That matches my experience: I can generally get some performance improvement by porting XSLT work to XQuery. However I'd start by choosing the right tool for the job, and getting the data model and processing model right. Then you can do any optimization work as you see performance problems.
I tend to keep as much code as possible in XQuery libraries, because I can call those functions from XSLT or XQuery. That makes it easier to move functionality between XQuery and XSLT. It also makes it easier to write tests. In case anyone's interested here's a micro-benchmark, with timings using 7.0-4 and my laptop. This expects certain element names and rewrites them in lower-case form. xquery version "1.0-ml"; xdmp:xslt-eval( <xsl:stylesheet xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"; xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform"; version="2.0"> <xsl:template match="ROOT"> <xsl:element name="root"> <xsl:apply-templates select="@*|node()"/> </xsl:element> </xsl:template> <xsl:template match="TEST"> <xsl:element name="test"> <xsl:apply-templates select="@*|node()"/> </xsl:element> </xsl:template> </xsl:stylesheet>, document { element ROOT { (1 to 100 * 1000) ! <TEST/> } }, ()) ! xdmp:describe(.) , xdmp:elapsed-time() => document{<root xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";><test/><test/><test/><test/><test/><test/><test/><test/><test/><...</root>} PT1.199259S xquery version "1.0-ml"; declare function local:do($n as node()) as node()? { typeswitch($n) case document-node() return document { local:do($n/node()) } case element(ROOT) return element root { $n/@*, local:do($n/node()) } case element(TEST) return element test { $n/@*, local:do($n/node()) } default return $n }; local:do( document { element ROOT { (1 to 100 * 1000) ! <TEST/> } }) ! xdmp:describe(.) , xdmp:elapsed-time() => document{<root><test/><test/><test/><test/><test/><test/><test/><test/><test/><...</root>} PT0.375941S Because this is such a simple test it probably exaggerates the differences vs real-world code. Also there may be opportunities to optimize both implementations. I tried to write each in a straightforward way, and the profiler shows about 60k expressions each way. The XQuery version does some pruning that I don't know how to do in XSLT. That accounts for about 10k expressions and 50-100 ms. -- Mike > On 11 Nov 2014, at 06:23 , Mary Holstege <[email protected]> wrote: > > I would expect performance to be similar or favor XQuery. A lot of the > underlying implementation is shared, and where it is not, the XQuery has a > lot more person years of optimization work behind it. > > //Mary > > On Nov 11, 2014 4:39 AM, [email protected] wrote: > Hi All, > > We are using XQuery to transform big payload from one to another format > (Change in structure and some filtering). Does any one have experience in > significant performance improvement when switching from XQuery to XSLT in > MarkLogic server. > > Thanks > Abhishek > This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are for the sole use of the > intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged > information. If you are not the intended recipient(s), please reply to the > sender and destroy all copies of the original message. Any unauthorized > review, use, disclosure, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of > this email, and/or any action taken in reliance on the contents of this > e-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Where permitted by > applicable law, this e-mail and other e-mail communications sent to and from > Cognizant e-mail addresses may be monitored. > _______________________________________________ > General mailing list > [email protected] > http://developer.marklogic.com/mailman/listinfo/general _______________________________________________ General mailing list [email protected] http://developer.marklogic.com/mailman/listinfo/general
