RE: [xsl] xslt on server-side vs. client-side

Subject: RE: [xsl] xslt on server-side vs. client-side
From: "Chris Bayes" <chris@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 16:13:41 -0000
I disagree. Sending xml/xslt to the client in most cases cuts down on
network traffic. All those nics/hubs/routers are using electricity too.
Just think of a table on a page that you want to sort by a particular
column. The serverside version has to round trip for each view which
takes up bandwidth whereas the clientside version is instantanious and
incurs no network overhead. Ok maybe there aren't that many examples of
that out there as you would use databinding or something if you were
doing it on an intranet and had control over the clients, but you would
be supprised at how many similar problems are ?solved? by roundtripping.
On the internet have you been to microsoft, sun or mapquest (to think of
3 sites I've been to today) where just changing your country in a
dropdown box causes a new page to be sent.
I've worked in places where the intranet was so slow it was quicker to
use sneakernet. 
So wether it is internet or intranet it is ecologically responsible to
use clientside transformations. Hmmmm does that mean xslt can get one of
those cute little green stickers?

Ciao Chris

XML/XSL Portal

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
> Hunsberger, Peter
> Sent: 16 November 2001 15:33
> To: 'xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
> Subject: RE: [xsl] xslt on server-side vs. client-side
> > Well a server sitting there doing nothing runs cool. A server fully 
> > loaded runs hot. Doing 1000's of transforms will make it 
> run hot. Hot 
> > servers use more electricity, stress disks, stress memory and 
> > generally die sooner. Let the reader pay ;-)
> Well, as someone who has had to provision both servers and 
> manage the design of their operating environments I won't 
> disagree, except, to point out that servers are designed to 
> make this kind of thing as efficient as possible. Similarly, 
> application server software is designed to make the 
> repetition of tasks as efficient as possible.  It would be a 
> fallacy to imagine that having the workload spread across 
> 1000 machines would save any electricity (and I don't think 
> anyone is saying or believing this).  If your target 
> environment is the internet, then certainly you can be 
> ecologically irresponsible and send the work to the users, 
> but if you're running an Intranet (as we do), then it would 
> be a bad idea on several levels (even if you have control 
> over the clients)...
>  XSL-List info and archive:

 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread