You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to fop-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org by bu...@apache.org on 2009/04/02 13:35:16 UTC
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 46956] New: Performance issue with 0.95 when
comparing to 0.20
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46956
Summary: Performance issue with 0.95 when comparing to 0.20
Product: Fop
Version: 0.95
Platform: PC
OS/Version: Windows XP
Status: NEW
Severity: major
Priority: P2
Component: pdf
AssignedTo: fop-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org
ReportedBy: sunil.budati@ge.com
I am upgrading my application FOP jar to 0.95 from 0.20 for PDF rendering. And
Now I have noticed huge performance issue with 0.95. if I render with 0.20
version it is taking 7 seconds to render where as with 0.95 it is taking 12
seconds. I could not any reason for this. I am using same xsl/xml files for
both versions. Is there any clue?
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 46956] Performance issue with 0.95 when comparing
to 0.20
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46956
Glenn Adams <gl...@skynav.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priority|P2 |P3
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 46956] Performance issue with 0.95 when comparing
to 0.20
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46956
Sunil <su...@ge.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEEDINFO |NEW
--- Comment #4 from Sunil <su...@ge.com> 2009-04-05 09:59:40 PST ---
After I debug the code indetail, I found the place where exactly delay occuring
with FOP 0.95. There is a xsl:for-each-group funtion in my xsl.
Then I removed the xsl:for-each-group function and related
methods in xsl, executed xsl in both 0.95 and 0.20. Now 0.95 version running
more rapidly. Can anyone please suggest me with what is the alternative for
this for-each group and related methods?
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 46956] Performance issue with 0.95 when comparing
to 0.20
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46956
--- Comment #3 from Andreas L. Delmelle <ad...@apache.org> 2009-04-02 12:58:21 PST ---
Just one small remark: the 'benchmark' seems to be taken from a single run, via
the command-line (I presume?). Plain fact is that the number of classes has
increased significantly between the two versions, so that makes the influence
of JVM warmup time all the greater. If you run FOP repeatedly from the
command-line, you may want to take the time to set up a small wrapper that
keeps the app sleeping in the background to avoid the VM startup.
Redo the test by running the same file in a Java program, looped to repeat 11
times. Compare times 2 to 10, and that will give you a more realistic picture
of the actual difference.
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 46956] Performance issue with 0.95 when comparing
to 0.20
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46956
--- Comment #1 from Sunil <su...@ge.com> 2009-04-02 04:45:43 PST ---
Even I have been tested with small XSL file. The result is same.
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 46956] Performance issue with 0.95 when comparing
to 0.20
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46956
--- Comment #5 from Glenn Adams <gl...@skynav.com> 2012-04-07 01:42:47 UTC ---
resetting P2 open bugs to P3 pending further review
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 46956] Performance issue with 0.95 when comparing
to 0.20
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46956
Max Berger <ma...@berger.name> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |NEEDINFO
Severity|major |enhancement
--- Comment #2 from Max Berger <ma...@berger.name> 2009-04-02 10:27:07 PST ---
Dear Sunil,
there are many changes in the rendering engine between 0.20 and 0.95 so that
times are not really comparable. 0.95 also supports more of the XSL spec.
That said, there haven been recent performance enhancements thanks to Jeremias.
However, they are applied to the trunk version, and are not in 0.95 (they will
be in the next version). Please retry your benchmarks using the current
version.
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.