You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@velocity.apache.org by Terry Steichen <te...@net-frame.com> on 2003/04/20 22:15:02 UTC
Relative Performance
I have a template containing repetitive loop in which each iteration requires a bunch of steps. It would be easier to read and manage if the actual processing steps were invoked via a macro, or via a parse directive invoking them in another template.
In general, is there is any significant performance differences between the three approaches: inline, macro, parse-template (assuming full template caching)?
Regards,
Terry
Re: Relative Performance
Posted by Simon Christian <si...@stoutstick.com>.
Hi Terry,
I did some simple (time only) tests a while back to try and ascertain
what the relative performance was of those three methods. I'm afraid I
don't have the figures to hand, but from memory there wasn't a great
deal in it until the number of iterations was high in the 000's. At that
point, as one might expect the order you've given was the order of most
to least performant.
- simon
Terry Steichen wrote:
> I have a template containing repetitive loop in which each iteration requires a bunch of steps. It would be easier to read and manage if the actual processing steps were invoked via a macro, or via a parse directive invoking them in another template.
>
> In general, is there is any significant performance differences between the three approaches: inline, macro, parse-template (assuming full template caching)?
>
> Regards,
>
> Terry
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: velocity-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: velocity-user-help@jakarta.apache.org