Bug 46956 - Performance issue with 0.95 when comparing to 0.20
Summary: Performance issue with 0.95 when comparing to 0.20
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: Fop - Now in Jira
Classification: Unclassified
Component: pdf (show other bugs)
Version: 0.95
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P3 enhancement
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: fop-dev
Depends on:
Reported: 2009-04-02 04:35 UTC by Sunil
Modified: 2012-04-07 01:51 UTC (History)
0 users


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Sunil 2009-04-02 04:35:15 UTC
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?
Comment 1 Sunil 2009-04-02 04:45:43 UTC
Even I have been tested with small XSL file. The result is same.
Comment 2 Max Berger 2009-04-02 10:27:07 UTC
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.
Comment 3 Andreas L. Delmelle 2009-04-02 12:58:21 UTC
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.
Comment 4 Sunil 2009-04-05 09:59:40 UTC
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?
Comment 5 Glenn Adams 2012-04-07 01:42:47 UTC
resetting P2 open bugs to P3 pending further review