Re: [xsl] Performance improvement for a recursive function?

[Manfred Staudinger <manfred.staudinger@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 13/12/2011, Michael Kay <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Sorry, haven't studied the problem in enough detail to answer this. The
> 9.3 code is clearly suboptimal, and is fixed in 9.4, which is all I
> really needed to establish.
No problem, will try it with 9.4 and report.

Regards,
Manfred

On 13/12/2011, Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 13/12/2011, Michael Kay <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> to process 41337 path commands it takes 861 sec! The first 5000 path
>>>> commands are processed in 14 sec (at 355.87 per sec) the last 5000
>>>> take 671 sec (only at 7.5 per sec).
>>> I'm seeing an execution time of about 90 seconds under Saxon-EE
>>> 9.3.0.11, down to 23 seconds under Saxon-EE 9.4.0.1
>> What baffles me is that with each tail-recursion it takes longer to
>> execute the function! Do you see this also with 9.4? Any idea about
>> the possible reason?
>
> Garbage collection, disk thrashing ?
>
> 1gb isn't much...
>
>
> --
> Andrew Welch
> http://andrewjwelch.com