Saxon

Legacy ID: #7436252 Legacy Poster: Andre (andre007)

//* can work parallel too. Actually parallel //* processing is multithreaded directory scanning, but the for-each parallelism is in the same topic..

Legacy ID: #7436288 Legacy Poster: Michael Kay (mhkay)

No, I'm afraid I haven't made any progress on multithreading in Saxon yet. I've been concentrating on streaming of large documents (that is, processing them without building a tree in memory), which may also give you benefits. One of the reasons for this is that the implementation is closely tracking the work we're doing in the W3C.

Legacy ID: #7436396 Legacy Poster: Andre (andre007)

We wrote our own threadpools before ExecutorService was available and still are using this .. For-Each parallelism is a highly missing thing and would give best boosting, especially with underling aggregations. Please think about it. //* makes no sense, but for-each .. hm... Currently 6core cpus are available, 8,12,16,24 cores will follow.. I think microsoft will publish its xpath 2.0 & xslt 2.0 implementation in parallel mode too. with 15, before 13 years ive developed 3d demos in turbo pascal and the time of recompiling will come. I am a very deep DB2 fan, because they do all in parallel due enterprise is the base. its your child. Best Regards, Andre

Legacy ID: #7436423 Legacy Poster: Michael Kay (mhkay)

I'm sure you're right that there are use cases that would benefit greatly from multithreading. I'm not confident that the optimizer can make good decisions on this, my first idea is to do it under user control (e.g. an extension attribute on xsl:for-each). But I'm afraid it hasn't made it into the release which I'm trying to get finished at the moment.

Legacy ID: #7436482 Legacy Poster: Andre (andre007)

< merci , The world is Nice /> Regards, Andre