Subject: RE: [xsl] Latest XSLTMark benchmark From: "Eugene Kuznetsov" <eugene@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 09:16:19 -0400 |
Everyone: the XSLTMark 2.0 results page has been updated to explain the error, and we have also contacted xml.com. Forward to what should be done: > I do think that the benchmark should be measuring parsing plus > transformation plus serialization, because that is the most typical usage > scenario, and because if you don't measure that, a processor that > optimizes > parsing or serialization based on knowledge of the stylesheet > gets no credit > for it. These are persuasive points, especially when it comes to some of the next-generation optimizations. Do any other XSLT implementors have an opinion on "parse+transform" vs. "transform only"? Kevin also correctly points out the usefulness of measuring memory consumption. This is even trickier to do right (although we have done some internal tests), but would be a very useful metric. Presumably one would express it as "kilobyte per kilobyte", where the first kilobyte is input size and the second one is heap size delta -- measuring "memory efficiency" of a processor. \\ Eugene Kuznetsov \\ eugene@xxxxxxxxxxxxx \\ DataPower Technology, Inc. XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] Latest XSLTMark benchmark, Michael Kay | Thread | Re: [xsl] Latest XSLTMark benchmark, Daniel Veillard |
[xsl] XML Update Client-Side tool (, Cristobal Galiano Fe | Date | RE: [xsl] illegal xhtml attributes?, Dominic Tocci |
Month |