Stefano, A new xmdrivers.jar is attached with an updated drived for XSLTC. You can now run your tests again.
You'll need a bunch of jars in "runxsltmark" scripts: XSLTCDriver) CLASSPATH=$WORKDIR/third-party/xalan-j/bin/BCEL.jar CLASSPATH=$WORKDIR/third-party/xalan-j/bin/xsltc.jar:$CLASSPATH CLASSPATH=$WORKDIR/third-party/xalan-j/bin/java_cup.jar:$CLASSPATH CLASSPATH=$WORKDIR/third-party/xalan-j/bin/JLex.jar:$CLASSPATH CLASSPATH=$WORKDIR/third-party/xalan-j/bin/regexp.jar:$CLASSPATH CLASSPATH=$WORKDIR/third-party/xalan-j/bin/runtime.jar:$CLASSPATH ;; (regexp is from jakarta) You may also need to modify default.conf in 'testcases' dir. For instance I have disabled 'dbonerow' which a very long time for translets (and I don't yet know why). If you have any trouble with running the benchmark send me email. --Jacek On Monday 18 February 2002 10:22 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > (cross posted to xalan-dev) > > > But can you use XSLTC with SAX Events? > > Yes. > > Some quick responses to Stefano's note... > > > 5) i haven't tested Xalan Translets, which, along with compiled XML > > might be *the* way to go for Cocoon production environments > > Yes, I think so. I'm surprised that people on the Cocoon side haven't done > more experimenting with Translets. > > Remember that XSLTC now implements that jaxp.xml.transformer interface, so > you should be able to Run with them fairly easily. > > > 2) XT is still spectacularly fast, even if abandoned a long time ago > > But not XSLT 1.0 complient... the edge cases in the spec do indeed eat > cycles. > > One thing I do is compile XT on the same compiler that Xalan is compiled > with, and use it with Xerces. (Also, with SAXON, use it with Xerces). > > > is still *way* faster than Xalan (twice as fast, normally) > > worries me very much. > > Yes. Believe me that I've spent a lot of time both with the DataPower > benchmarks and in JProbe. Some of the difference is in the serializers (I > don't think Cocoon is using Xalan's serializers anyway), which I've been > working on. Some of the difference is probably in source tree > construction. Probably a major difference is in the instrumentation that > Xalan provides, and the state tracking that it does. I'm working at > improving this particular issue by using derived classes when > instrumentation is needed. > > Some other performance improvements that *haven't* been checked in yet or > are on a branch: > 1) General reduction of state tracking > 2) Reduction of redundant expressions (4x improvement on one of the Cocoon > files that Davinum gave us, but fairly little diff on DataPower > benchmarks). > 3) Serialization improvements > > A major issue with Xalan is the source tree representation, which is > currently the DTM. XSLTC uses a format very similar to the DTM (the > current DTM is partly copied from XSLTC, with development ongoing Xalan > interpretive and compiled to use the same source tree). Even SAXON has a > DTM-like source tree, originally copied from the Xalan notion (I'm pretty > sure). But the DTM has some serious drawbacks too (subtree pruning is > hard, and array access in Java tends to be a bit slow). > > > Flamesuit on, fire at need. > > Not interested in flame wars. If you would like to discuss the technical > details of what's going on, I would be glad to. The issues aren't simple, > though the results and the perception of the results are. > > -scott > > > > > > Jörn Heid > <heid@fh-heilbron To: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> n.de> cc: (bcc: Scott > Boag/Cambridge/IBM) Subject: AW: some XSLT benchmarks 02/17/2002 06:25 > PM > Please respond to > cocoon-dev > > > > > > > Electric XML is not SAX or DOM based. For that it won't make sense I think. > But XSLTC will be a nice alternative. But can you use XSLTC with SAX > Events? > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Ivanov, Ivelin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Gesendet: Sonntag, 17. Februar 2002 23:21 > An: 'Stefano Mazzocchi '; 'Apache Cocoon ' > Cc: 'Apache Xalan ' > Betreff: RE: some XSLT benchmarks > > > > Thесе benchmarkс make it clear that Xalan J is far > from the winner. > For completeness however, wouldn't it be fare to include XSLTC as well. > Also Electric XML is a fast free parser which should probably be taken into > account. http://www.themindelectric.com/products/xml/benchmarks.html > > > Regards, > > Ivelin > > -----Original Message----- > From: Stefano Mazzocchi > To: Apache Cocoon > Cc: Apache Xalan > Sent: 16.2.2002 a. 10:58 > Subject: some XSLT benchmarks > > [crossposting on xalan-dev since they might be interested in these > results] > > I want to have numbers to know whether or not a native implementation of > an XSLT transformer for Cocoon would make sense, so I did some > benchmarks. > > I used XSLTMark and rerun the test on my machine (old laptop, but > anyway), here are the results, I'll commment them below. > > Hardware > ======== > > Sony VAIO PCG-F280 > Intel Pentium II 366 Mhz > 128 Mb RAM > Microsoft Windows 2000 - Service Pack 3 [1] > > > > Xalan-J (built into JDK 1.4, uses crimson) > ------- > > Sun 1.4.0 (client) 108,73 > > Xalan-J 2.3 + Xerces 2.0 (latest and greatest) > ------- > > IBM 1.3.0 74,80 > Sun 1.3.1_02 56,45 > Sun 1.4.0 (client) 55,11 > > Xalan-J 2.3 + Crimson > --------------------- > > IBM 1.3.0 85,27 > Sun 1.4.0 (client) 76,02[2] > > Xalan-J 2.2.0 + Xerces 1.4.4 (shipped with Cocoon 2.0.1) > ------------------------------ > > IBM 1.3.0 85,27 > Sun 1.3.1_02 61,08 > Sun 1.4.0 (client) 57,10 > > Saxon 6.5.1 > ----------- > > IBM 1.3.0 147,78 > Sun 1.3.1_02 120,99 > Sun 1.4.0 (client) 103,58 > Sun 1.4.0 (server) 79,52 > > XT + XP > ------- > > IBM 1.3.0 251,62 > Sun 1.3.1_02 244,64 > Sun 1.4.0 (client) 229,44 > Sun 1.4.0 (server) 171,26 > > > MSXML > ----- > > (native) 322,95 > > > FastXML (http://www.geocities/fastxml/) > --------------------------------------- > > (native) 1056,99[2] > > > NOTES: > > [1] all programs in the tray bar or background were removed, ethernet > disconnected, and mouse left untouched during the runs. > > [2] this was obtained by moving 'xalan.jar' into the > java_home/lib/endorsed > directory, but without moving 'xerces-impl.jar' so that the default SAX > handler is the one shipped with the JDK 1.4 (which is crimson). > > [2] this processor is an half-baked win32-only version which was > optimized > by hand for the x86 architecture and had some parsing and compliance > errors > (XSLTMark reports 70% compliance, against 94% for MSXML and 100% for > saxon and > Xalan) > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > A few things to note: > > 1) Xalan is slow. Sorry people, but almost every serious parser beats > Xalan in terms of pure throughtput. The fact that XT (abandoned by > years) is still *way* faster than Xalan (twice as fast, normally) > worries me very much. > > WARNING: I've run the tests as the guys in XSLTMark wrote them, so it is > entirely possible they didn't use optimization tricks. If you Xalan > folks know some and want to rewrite the Xalan driver for XSLTMark, I'm > sure everyone here will appreciate that. > > 2) XT is still spectacularly fast, even if abandoned a long time ago (I > used the source from www.jclark.com not the ones from 4xt.org). Cocoon > will continue to ship it as long as Xalan can match its speed (and I > still can't imagine why it doesn't!) > > 3) Xerces 2.0 appears slower than Xerces 1.4.4, and crimson appears > faster than Xerces in almost every case. > > 4) MSXML is faster than XT, but it't not using a SAX interface, so, as > Berin suggested, connecting a native SAX handler might waste the benefit > of native speed thru the JNI connection since lots of methods must be > called. > > I think Ovidiu is right saying that we should concentrate on having a > faster (lighter?) and even non-completely-compliant XSLT processor that > is focused on speed. > > 5) i haven't tested Xalan Translets, which, along with compiled XML > might be *the* way to go for Cocoon production environments: when you > need speed, you compile your XML files (so get rid of the parsing stage) > and compile the XSLT into translets (then we could easily wrap them and > make them cocoon transformers) and we could be ready to kick ass.... but > there was no XSLTMark driver for the Xalan translets (only for old Sun's > XSLTC) and I didn't have time to write one myself (hint hint). > > 6) the FastXML parser is real, but I think it's cheating: writing an > XSLT processor in assembly is a total waste of time, with the price of > development compared with the price of hardware. Anyway, I asked the > author (who now works for Microsoft.. guess why :) if she cared to open > source it and donate the code to us. I'll let you know if anything > happens here. > > At the end: we need faster XSLT processing and I'm sorry but Xalan > doesn't seem to be leading the way as I would like it to do :/ > > Flamesuit on, fire at need.
xmdrivers.jar
Description: application/jar
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]