On 9/18/17 10:38, Alexander Lakhin wrote: > Peter, can you show what performance drop you see with the profiling > (e.g. for HTML)? > I get the following numbers: > 1. make html with profiling (import profile-chunk.xsl in stylesheet.xsl): > 85.98user 0.76system 1:29.85elapsed > > 2. make html without profiling (import chunk.xsl in stylesheet.xsl): > 77.36user 0.62system 1:21.28elapsed > > 3. Separate profiling (performed before making epub, as dbtoepub doesn't > support profiling) > 8.52user 0.22system 0:10.31elapsed > > So I get ~10% performance drop when making html. Are you concerned about > the same overhead?
Yeah, that's about what I see. > I would choose some standard way to have separate content in the same > file, but if the overhead is not acceptable, and we're not going to > extend the profiling usage, then we need to invent something that will > complicate XML-related processing (I think about translation but the > other issues are possible too). It's only for the INSTALL file and won't get used anywhere else, so I think it's OK to have a bit of an ad-hoc system. > Jürgen, this approach implemented by applying profiling.xsl in Makefile > (for make postgres.epub). (See Makefile in > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/attachment/54854/pg-doc.check.tar.bz2) I hadn't even looked at that yet, but that kind of supports my point. Injecting the profiling layer everywhere is going to be annoying. -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs
