xmlgraphics-fop-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Coppens <pc.subscripti...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Fop 0.95beta - svg tif images
Date Fri, 11 Apr 2008 17:47:46 GMT
>> although the fact that 0.94 is faster than 0.95beta-jeremias-tiff  
>> would make that ....weird.
> Not really. It would be much weirder IMO if FOP (or any software for  
> that matter) were to offer increased flexibility/functionality/ 
> features without any performance penalty whatsoever. If that were  
> the case, Vista should run on a 386 without any noticeable slow-down  
> when compared to, say, Windows 3.11... errmmm.
Oh...well let's leave windows out of this .... :)
> I'd think it pretty 'normal' that the new image-handling framework  
> adds /some/ overhead. A factor of six would be on the high side,  
> though, but nothing points in the direction of the image-handling  
> framework alone. A lot has been changed and added between 0.94 and  
> 0.95, so even though this may seem 'weird', I somehow expect 0.95 to  
> be slightly slower than 0.94.
I understand that...no such thing as a free lunch. But as you said, a  
factor 6 (assuming what I found is correct) irrespective of where in  
fop/xmlgraphics/batik the slowdown lies, is...a lot.

> Also, since (I presume) you are timing singular runs, there is no  
> accounting for things like static initialization. This only occurs  
> for the very first run in a given runtime session. If the newer code  
> moved some parts to those areas, then this would only slow down that  
> first run, but could speed up/save memory in all subsequent runs in  
> the same VM.

Well, the numbers come from single runs yes. Otoh, I started out with  
a stylesheet with more tiff's (which is how I originally ran into the  
slowdown). There the performance penalty was far worse ...to the  
extent that it makes the (web) application unusable with 0.95beta. To  
be complete - that was before the 'jeremias-tiff' version.

I'll try to find some time to ...well...not sure what I can do. But  
it's either ignore post 0.94 versions or fix something (and I want to  
use post 0.94 versions for different reasons)

I will try to profile the code I guess and figure out where the  
problem might have been introduced (which will be quite an adventure  
having no real idea how the code is structured nor what was changed  
when...I know svn does help there).

To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-users-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: fop-users-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org

View raw message