Hi Hernando,
The lower memory consumption of Xalan-C++ I can believe, but I'm surprised
that Xalan-C's performance would be that much greater than Xalan-J's. Of
course, that could be related to the kinds of stylesheets you were using,
so others may have different results.
I suspect the latest Xalan-J has closed the gap in performance, but not
memory consumption. In fact, the latest Xalan-C has lower memory
consumption than 1.3, so I would suspect it will take a while for Xalan-J
to catch up, if it ever does.
Dave
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
oftware.com To:
xalan-c-users@xml.apache.org
cc: (bcc: David N
Bertoni/Cambridge/IBM)
05/15/2003 09:44 AM Subject: RE: Writing
Multiple Documents
About a year ago I made some tests for one of our projects and at the time
(Xalan-C++ 1.3 and Xalan-J 2.2, I think) we got between 3.5 and 4.5 times
better performance with the C++ version. I haven't tested since. Memory
consumption was also significantly higher in Java.
Hernando
-----Original Message-----
From: Don McClimans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2003 12:40 PM
To: xalan-c-users@xml.apache.org
Subject: RE: Writing Multiple Documents
Hi Hernando,
I have not used Xalan-J, and wonder what your experience has been comparing
performance between Xalan-C and Xalan-J. I'm not looking for exact numbers
of course, just a feel for how they compare. Thanks,
Don McClimans
