Clay Leeds wrote:
Not trying to belabor a point, just trying to get understanding of how
this all works. I would think that JVM only has to start once during a
processing instance.
This is correct. The start and warp-up overhead accounts for the
difference between the 2s for page rendering and
J,
J.Pietschmann wrote:
Clay Leeds wrote:
Not trying to belabor a point, just trying to get understanding of how
this all works. I would think that JVM only has to start once during a
processing instance.
This is correct. The start and warp-up overhead accounts for the
difference between
Howdy folks,
I have a file where I've commented a fairly large section of my source
XML file (commented areas affect FLOW content--so it won't print out so
many darn pages! :-). I've found significant discrepancies involving the
timing of outputting the commented version vs. the uncommented
Sorry for the re-post. I'd neglected to include some information on the
XML file info summary for the un-commented version. I've included it, as
well as a summary of the FOP .4 .5rc rendering times. You can delete
the previous post.
:-)
Howdy folks,
I have a file where I've commented a
Hey Maestro!
Have you tried to run only the XSLT part of it? Do that and compare
execution times there. That should be interesting.
Jeremias Maerki
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email:
Jeremias,
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
Hey Maestro!
Have you tried to run only the XSLT part of it? Do that and compare
execution times there. That should be interesting.
Jeremias Maerki
I don't know how to run only the XSLT part of it... Can you give any
more information as to what you're
Run the XSL transformation alone. Using fop.bat you've done:
XML XSL-FO --- PDF
(XSLT) (FOP)
The XSLT part of it is this:
XML XSL-FO
(XSLT)
(I hope the ASCII art comes out ok)
Since the comments should in theory not reach FOP it is my guess that
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
Run the XSL transformation alone. Using fop.bat you've done:
XML XSL-FO --- PDF
(XSLT) (FOP)
The XSLT part of it is this:
XML XSL-FO
(XSLT)
(I hope the ASCII art comes out ok)
Since the comments should in theory not reach
On 23.01.2003 22:15:17 Clay Leeds wrote:
It helps. However, I only have fop-0.20.4 (.5rc) installed. I also
notice that in the lib/ folder I've got xalan-2.3.1.jar. Will this
suffice, or do I need to install the full version of xalan. Also, the
current version of xalan is 2.4.1... should I
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
On 23.01.2003 22:15:17 Clay Leeds wrote:
It helps. However, I only have fop-0.20.4 (.5rc) installed. I also
notice that in the lib/ folder I've got xalan-2.3.1.jar. Will this
suffice, or do I need to install the full version of xalan. Also, the
current version of xalan
On 23.01.2003 22:47:20 Clay Leeds wrote:
snip/
That worked great (except I had to change the version numbers for xerces
(xercesImpl-2.0.1.jar) xalan(xalan-2.3.1.jar) (which was probably
expcected :-):
C:\Program Files\Java\fop-0.20.4java -cp
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
On 23.01.2003 22:47:20 Clay Leeds wrote:
snip/
That worked great (except I had to change the version numbers for xerces
(xercesImpl-2.0.1.jar) xalan(xalan-2.3.1.jar) (which was probably
expcected :-):
C:\Program Files\Java\fop-0.20.4java -cp
I ran the XSLT transform twice (just out of curiosity), and there was
about 300ms difference between the two identicalk runs. However, it is
more in line with the results we were expecting. However, it was still
about 15-18 seconds shorter than my previous results (diligently
watching the
Would you think we should put a Xalan.bat/Xalan.sh file
into the FOP distribution? (or xslt.bar/xslt.sh)
J.Pietschmann
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Clay Leeds wrote:
It took 2 seconds of rendering time compared to 65 seconds of time taken
from command line [Enter] to FOP output completion.
This latter time includes JVM startup, loading all the code and
whatnot. Occasionally the OS is busy and it takes longer to load
an executable and the
J.Pietschmann wrote:
Would you think we should put a Xalan.bat/Xalan.sh file
into the FOP distribution? (or xslt.bar/xslt.sh)
Very good idea. Probably most people create these
batchfiles/shellscripts anyway.
Might also lead to more people trying the transformation
step separately to see where
J.Pietschmann wrote:
Would you think we should put a Xalan.bat/Xalan.sh file
into the FOP distribution? (or xslt.bar/xslt.sh)
J.Pietschmann
That's an intriguing idea. Assuming that it would help trouble-shoot
problems like this, that might be good for this type of testing. Also, I
noticed a
.
-Original Message-
From: J.Pietschmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 5:25 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: FOP 0.20.4 5rc timing w large COMMENT sections
Would you think we should put a Xalan.bat/Xalan.sh file
into the FOP distribution? (or xslt.bar/xslt.sh
Patrick Dean Rusk wrote:
I think it would be preferable to have a FOP option to output the
intermediate FO file that it uses in its processing, similar to the way many
compilers can output some of their intermediate files.
It's well-known feature request, see
Patrick Dean Rusk wrote:
Just today I've finally diagnosed a strangeness in my program to the fact
that using FOP to transform gives a different result sometimes than doing
the transform manually and following it with a FOP run on the .fo file. In
my case, the difference was from having the
20 matches
Mail list logo
