On Sat, Nov 25, 2017 at 7:18 PM, Alexander Lakhin <exclus...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks! Just to compare your results with my: > > number match name mode Calls Tot 100us > Avg > 0 d:appendix label.markup 22503 70018988 > 3111 > 1 chunk-all-sections 1394 36361616 > 26084 > 2 d:chapter label.markup 24918 20792834 > 834 > 3 href.target 23895 18556477 > 776 > 4 footer.navigation 1394 5276429 > 3785 > 5 header.navigation 1394 5095535 > 3655 > 6 gentext.template 237071 857659 > 3 > > vs > > number match name mode Calls Tot 100us > Avg > > 0 gentext.template 247659 742878 > 2 > 1 chunk-all-sections 1394 705195 > 505 > 2 href.target 35446 663090 > 18
Hmm. Well, this is all new to me but I'd have expected the numbers in the "Calls" column to be entirely deterministic. Perhaps that business about conditional use of UnwrapLinks and other things like it change the numbers. It's interesting that "gentext.template" is in the same ballpark on our two systems in terms of calls and CPU time, but the top templates are massive outliers on my system. I have no idea what I'm even looking at really but I couldn't help noticing that templates with match="chapter" and match="appendix" appear in our tree in sgml/stylesheet-speedup-common.xsl with a comment "Performance-optimized versions of some upstream templates from common/ directory". Could it be that whatever performance-enhancing trick they perform doesn't work on 1.1.32, or alternatively they are not being reached so we're falling back to non-optimised versions instead of these? > I wonder, what version of docbook-xsl are you using? > (I have 1.79.1+dfsg-1). > Can you check with 1.79+ (if yours is older)? docbook-xsl version 1.79.2_1. -- Thomas Munro http://www.enterprisedb.com
