xmlgraphics-fop-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From <Ryan.Asle...@stpaul.com>
Subject Re: Why is FO(P) a superior model than what most proprietary tool s propose
Date Wed, 01 May 2002 13:00:13 GMT

>>The memory requirements depend on the complexity of the
>>layout (tables spanning multiple pages are bad), how big
>>included graphics are (they are all held in memory), and,
>>often the worst of all, whether you are using forward
>>references, like the popular "page x of y" (which forces
>>all pages and dependent data to be held in memory until
>>rendering is finished).

>>I've been able to render 500 Page books without problems.

Very true.  The past few weeks we've been building a prototype to see if
FOP would serve our needs.  We've done some testing to see how big of a
report we could make.  Within a servlet environment, the biggest PDF we've
created was 12,443 pages (really!) representing 74,350 database records. We
avoided forward references and insert page-sequences every so often to
avoid memory problems.  We also used SAX events instead of DOM to create
the appropriate XML.

The down side is this humongous report took 1 hour 40 minutes to render on
a 700 MHz Win2000/Intel server.  Most "normal" sized reports only take 1-2
minutes.



Mime
View raw message