RE: Performance tuning.
Nothing is not yet submitted, due to circumstances at work. I think I can send a part of it next week that gives aboute 30% faster fop. Henrik Venu Reddy [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2002-10-24 20:28 Please respond to fop-dev To:[EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject:RE: Performance tuning. Hi, What is the current status of this performance tuning. Have the code changes been submitted and performance benefits verified. I really could use some speed improvements with fop, I have some very large reports 400/500 pages that are taking 5+ minutes to run. Thanks, Venu Reddy P.S: I am willing to apply the code changes to my version of fop(0.20.4), test it and submit the results on my large fo files. -Original Message- From: Martin Poeschl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 11:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Performance tuning. Henrik Olsson wrote: Hi. I have runned several performance tests on the FOP and and I have found out several bottle necks (especially in the PropertyListBuilder). Most things is about reducing gc and some others about not so well written code. The result of this tunings gives me a speed of 3 time faster than the original FOP. WOW!!! So what do I do to get the code in to the fop-project (the problems are both in the fop 0.20.4 and in the DEV 1.0). I have also figured out some more thing but they are not so general but it makes the FOP as fast as a comersial tool written in C++ (StreamServe). could you make your patched version available somewhere??? if you don't have a server, just send it to my private mail and i'll put it in my home_dir at the apache server ;-) martin Henrik. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Performance tuning.
Hello dear Venu, Am Donnerstag, 24. Oktober 2002 20:28 schrieb Venu Reddy: Hi, What is the current status of this performance tuning. Have the code changes been submitted and performance benefits verified. I really could use some speed improvements with fop, I have some very large reports 400/500 pages that are taking 5+ minutes to run. I don't know wether you already discussed this: If you create indices, tocs and other page references, you might want to create them seperately and instead run fop several times on the same document (often fop is run repeatedly anyway), do it the way TeX does it. This might also speed up things a little. Anyway, I create student guides for courses here, they also tend to be big, the same size as your docs. Usually it takes about 30-90 seconds to fop them or less (Laptop, Athlon XP 1600+). Bye -- ITCQIS GmbH Christian Wolfgang Hujer Geschäftsführender Gesellschafter Telefon:+49 (0)89 27 37 04 37 Telefax:+49 (0)89 27 37 04 39 E-Mail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.itcqis.com/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Performance tuning.
Hi, What is the current status of this performance tuning. Have the code changes been submitted and performance benefits verified. I really could use some speed improvements with fop, I have some very large reports 400/500 pages that are taking 5+ minutes to run. Thanks, Venu Reddy P.S: I am willing to apply the code changes to my version of fop(0.20.4), test it and submit the results on my large fo files. -Original Message- From: Martin Poeschl [mailto:mpoeschl;marmot.at] Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 11:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Performance tuning. Henrik Olsson wrote: Hi. I have runned several performance tests on the FOP and and I have found out several bottle necks (especially in the PropertyListBuilder). Most things is about reducing gc and some others about not so well written code. The result of this tunings gives me a speed of 3 time faster than the original FOP. WOW!!! So what do I do to get the code in to the fop-project (the problems are both in the fop 0.20.4 and in the DEV 1.0). I have also figured out some more thing but they are not so general but it makes the FOP as fast as a comersial tool written in C++ (StreamServe). could you make your patched version available somewhere??? if you don't have a server, just send it to my private mail and i'll put it in my home_dir at the apache server ;-) martin Henrik. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Performance tuning.
Henrik Olsson wrote: Hi. I have runned several performance tests on the FOP and and I have found out several bottle necks (especially in the PropertyListBuilder). Most things is about reducing gc and some others about not so well written code. The result of this tunings gives me a speed of 3 time faster than the original FOP. WOW!!! So what do I do to get the code in to the fop-project (the problems are both in the fop 0.20.4 and in the DEV 1.0). I have also figured out some more thing but they are not so general but it makes the FOP as fast as a comersial tool written in C++ (StreamServe). could you make your patched version available somewhere??? if you don't have a server, just send it to my private mail and i'll put it in my home_dir at the apache server ;-) martin Henrik. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Performance tuning.
Hi Henrik I have started the task to create diffs. Great. But it makes it a bit complecated since there are about 10 diffrent things i have done to the code and some things affects more then 20 source files. So the question are: Do You want all the changes in one bunch or them separated in 10 diffrent groups that belongs together? Have you tried to run the diff from the src directory? Then, CVS should create a diff that spans all modified files in this directory. I hope this helps. Before I became a committer I used to do the diffing in WinCVS and copy/paste the results together to a single file. But I heard that's not best practice. I hope this helps. Jeremias Maerki - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Performance tuning.
Hi Jeremias. I have started the task to create diffs. But it makes it a bit complecated since there are about 10 diffrent things i have done to the code and some things affects more then 20 source files. So the question are: Do You want all the changes in one bunch or them separated in 10 diffrent groups that belongs together? Henrik Jeremias Maerki [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2002-10-17 10:56 Please respond to fop-dev To:[EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject:Re: Performance tuning. Henrik, that sounds very interesting. Normal procedures for sending changes is to create a unified CVS diff file. You'll find some instructions following the URL below: http://xml.apache.org/source.html It's best if you post the two diff files (against the maintenance branch and the main branch) in a BugZilla entry, so it's not likely to get lost. One of the committers (I'll try to do it during the weekend if you can submit it it before then) will then review and apply the patch to the codebase. BugZilla is here: http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/ Thanks a lot! I have runned several performance tests on the FOP and and I have found out several bottle necks (especially in the PropertyListBuilder). Most things is about reducing gc and some others about not so well written code. The result of this tunings gives me a speed of 3 time faster than the original FOP. So what do I do to get the code in to the fop-project (the problems are both in the fop 0.20.4 and in the DEV 1.0). I have also figured out some more thing but they are not so general but it makes the FOP as fast as a comersial tool written in C++ (StreamServe). Jeremias Maerki - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Performance tuning.
Hi Henrik, whatever the FOP-developers say, I'd like totry andimplement your improvements in the project I'm working on. 3 times as fast, it's a dream come true! Here's my address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cheers Guy - Original Message - From: Henrik Olsson To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 10:30 AM Subject: Performance tuning. Hi.I have runned several performance tests on the FOP and and I have foundout several bottle necks (especially in the PropertyListBuilder).Most things is about reducing gc and some others about not so well writtencode.The result of this tunings gives me a speed of 3 time faster than theoriginal FOP.So what do I do to get the code in to the fop-project (the problems areboth in the fop 0.20.4 and in the DEV 1.0).I have also figured out some more thing but they are not so general but itmakes the FOP as fast as a comersial tool written in C++ (StreamServe).Henrik.
Re: Performance tuning.
Henrik, that sounds very interesting. Normal procedures for sending changes is to create a unified CVS diff file. You'll find some instructions following the URL below: http://xml.apache.org/source.html It's best if you post the two diff files (against the maintenance branch and the main branch) in a BugZilla entry, so it's not likely to get lost. One of the committers (I'll try to do it during the weekend if you can submit it it before then) will then review and apply the patch to the codebase. BugZilla is here: http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/ Thanks a lot! I have runned several performance tests on the FOP and and I have found out several bottle necks (especially in the PropertyListBuilder). Most things is about reducing gc and some others about not so well written code. The result of this tunings gives me a speed of 3 time faster than the original FOP. So what do I do to get the code in to the fop-project (the problems are both in the fop 0.20.4 and in the DEV 1.0). I have also figured out some more thing but they are not so general but it makes the FOP as fast as a comersial tool written in C++ (StreamServe). Jeremias Maerki - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
