Subject: RE: [xsl] hardware xml / xslt From: "Robert Koberg" <rob@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 05:04:23 -0700 |
> -----Original Message----- > From: owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Michael Kay > Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 2:31 AM > To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: RE: [xsl] hardware xml / xslt > > > > I don't know, I recently saw some benchmarks for xalan(c++ > > version) running against large(10+ mb) xml files and it > > performed worst out of the processors involved, msxml > > performed best(can't remember where I read this). I suppose > > one reason for datapower's product would be that it handles > > large xml files quickly, in that context and if xalan indeed > > does perform poorly against large files it does not seem to > > be a good comparison. > > > Hey, you wouldn't expect them to compare themselves against the *best* > of the competition, would you? This is a US software company, after all, > not a team of gentleman cricket players. Who is the fastest, Mike? Caucho's Resin? libxml/xsl? It is not Saxon. Who do you think they should use? *Everybody* seems to use Xalan as the baseline because it is blessed by Apache and SUN. I think you are a brilliant man, Mike, but this was a dickless statement. I don't need to hear US-bashing on this list too. -Rob > > Michael Kay > Software AG > home: Michael.H.Kay@xxxxxxxxxxxx > work: Michael.Kay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] hardware xml / xslt, Michael Kay | Thread | RE: [xsl] hardware xml / xslt, bryan |
RE: [xsl] hardware xml / xslt, Michael Kay | Date | RE: [xsl] hardware xml / xslt, bryan |
Month |