This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
Re: Q on incremental processing and count()
- From: Enke Michael <Michael dot Enke at wincor-nixdorf dot com>
- To: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
- Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 15:30:31 +0100
- Subject: Re: [xsl] Q on incremental processing and count()
- Organization: Wincor Nixdorf GmbG & Co. KG
- References: <3C6CF684.12B0BD3D@wincor-nixdorf.com> <000701c1b681$349ee6f0$45b7128b@joerg>
- Reply-to: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
Joerg Heinicke wrote:
>
> Hello Michael,
>
> it's not clear what you want to do. Your variables are ok, no problems to
> see. You only can shorten them:
>
> <xsl:variable name="col-num" select="10"/>
>
> <xsl:variable name="col-num" select="count(thead/th-row)"/>
>
> <xsl:variable name="col-num" select="count(thead[1]/th-row)"/>
>
> Between the two last declarations there should be no difference, because of
> your XML.
>
> But what exactly is the problem? What's the result you get and you expect?
> What's the context of the variable declaration?
>
> Regards,
>
> Joerg
>
> XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
My problem is the execution speed.
I have a large table (200 entries) and split them into small tables (per
table 20 entries, every subtable with the same table header).
My problem is: The browser gets the result if all 200 entries are processed in
the memory! Arrrrgggg...
But I expected to see the tables as they come out of the database.
Because for investigating I made it so, that every item needs half a second
to be generated.
I expected to see the first sub table after 20*0.5 seconds, the second table
after 2*20*0.5 seconds and so on.
But actually I see all tables not before 200*0.5 seconds :-(
If I remove the count() and ...following-sibling... I lost my
table structure but I can see how the values come out as they
were produced.
Regards,
Michael
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list