This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
more on XSLT processor performance
- To: xsl-list at mulberrytech dot com
- Subject: more on XSLT processor performance
- From: Sebastian Rahtz <sebastian dot rahtz at computing-services dot oxford dot ac dot uk>
- Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 13:55:51 +0100 (BST)
- References: <7784D3376646D311B082000021CF26243F8277@PIKE>
- Reply-To: xsl-list at mulberrytech dot com
People who like these things may like to re-examine
http://users.ox.ac.uk/~rahtz/xsltest/Report.html, as I have redone all
my tests. I added Transformiix into the set, and the sieve of
erathosthenes, and also ran my largest data file (4227978 elements).
I have run the tests with MSXML3, but the computer's clock was
broken:-} I cannot run it on the same computer as the other tests, cos
MS ie5setup has left my Windows setup in an unuseable state, and I
gave up after wasting 1/2 hours rebooting the machine 50
times. Anyway, the July MS thing seemed to scoot along nicely, so far
as I can tell, on most of the tests. Someone with more patience than
me can retry...
My conclusions, again
:
- XT: efficient and fast, but not complete or entirely conformant
- Saxon: efficient, fast and conformant (a few, a very few, bugs)
- Oracle: fast, conformant, but does not scale as well as XT and
Saxon *in my environment*. much greater memory use, and slows down
in my memory setup with larger files. bug in ora:output
- Xalan: slows down (or dies) considerably on larger jobs, but delivers the
goods otherwise.
- Sablotron: incomplete (work in progress), and gets locked in bigger
jobs for ever, but looking promising
- Transformiix: has a good go, but cannot cope with larger files
- MSXML3 (July): looking good, but not there yet
For my type of work, in my computer setup, Saxon wins pretty
easily. Others will have different criteria to choose from what is
really a very rich field of contenders.
Sebastian Rahtz
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list