Subject: Re: XSL/T Engine Comparisons From: Paul Tchistopolskii <paul@xxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 16:10:07 -0700 |
----- Original Message ----- From: Sebastian Rahtz > Paul Tchistopolskii writes: > > When I was experimenting with different XSLT engines, > > I found that only XT survived processing of large documents, > > all other engines fail to scale - the result usually was the > > "blow up" described above. > > I would have agreed, until the 5.3 generation of Saxon. Have you been > able to push that over yet? I have not. No I have not. I'm almost sure that SAXON 5.3 scales better than the version of SAXON which I was testing long time ago ( because SAXON 5.3 was a major rewrite ). Those who want to test it in the way I did, it appears that egroups still contains some variant of benchmark I have been using. http://www.egroups.com/message/xml-server/203?&start=200 Rgds.Paul. XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: XSL/T Engine Comparisons, Sebastian Rahtz | Thread | Re: XSL/T Engine Comparisons, Sebastian Rahtz |
Re: XSL/T Engine Comparisons, Sebastian Rahtz | Date | Re: XSL/T Engine Comparisons, Steve Muench |
Month |