The best advice is to try it and see for yourself. That said, I'd expect
the single matcher to perform significantly better as it doesn't have
the overhead of serializing and re-parsing the intermediate
transformation results.
Vil.
Antonio Fiol Bonnín wrote:
Hello,
I would like to improve performance on my cocoon application. I had an
idea, but I'd like to confirm that it would be useful.
On my sitemap, I have many small matchers, like:
<map:match pattern="foo">
<map:generate type="file" src="cocoon:/bar"/>
<map:transform type="xslt" src="bar2foo.xsl"/>
<map:serialize type="xml" />
</map:match>
<map:match pattern="bar">
<map:generate type="file" src="cocoon:/xyz"/>
<map:transform type="xslt" src="xyz2bar.xsl"/>
<map:serialize type="xml" />
</map:match>
<map:match pattern="xyz">
<map:generate type="file" src="abc"/>
<map:transform type="xslt" src="abc2xyz.xsl"/>
<map:serialize type="xml" />
</map:match>
Would I get better performance with the following "foo" pipeline?
<map:match pattern="bar">
<map:generate type="file" src="abc"/>
<map:transform type="xslt" src="abc2xyz.xsl"/>
<map:transform type="xslt" src="xyz2bar.xsl"/>
<map:transform type="xslt" src="bar2foo.xsl"/>
<map:serialize type="xml" />
</map:match>
Of course, such a sitemap would be less maintainable and more
difficult to debug (unless I use views, which is a nice possibility),
but performance IS an issue at the moment.
If the former "foo" pipeline gets better performance, could one
optimize this somehow? How?
<map:match pattern="foobar">
<map:aggregate element="foobar">
<map:part src="cocoon:/foo" />
<map:part src="cocoon:/bar" />
</map:aggregate>
<map:serialize type="xml" />
</map:match>
Thank you very much.
--
Antonio
--
http://www.vilyaharvey.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
