| BIRT report with XML datasource: performance problem [message #158122] |
Thu, 04 May 2006 04:35  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: marc.leineweber.icc-gmbh.de
Hello,
there once was a similar question to this group but nobody gave a hint to a
solution, so I try it again. Does anybody use XML datasource without
performance problems, and if yes can provide an example report? I started
with BIRT 2.0.1, but the problem is still present in 2.1rc2.
I have a report basing on an XML datasource and three datasets defined for
the source, my report contains two subreports. I have no big amount of data
rows (2 in the main dataset with 1 and 1 resp. 6 and 7 in the datasets for
the subreport), but it takes 12 seconds to run and render the report. It
seems to me that the XML file is parsed multiple times, so the question is:
is there a cache to activate or do I have to use a special XML structure to
avoid the performance problem?
Thank you in advance, regards
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: BIRT report with XML datasource: performance problem [message #159255 is a reply to message #158122] |
Tue, 09 May 2006 02:05  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Marc, can you please file a Bugzilla bug and attach the XML data and report
design that's giving you the performance problem? BIRT engineers can then
investigate.
thanks,
--
Gary Xue
Actuate Corporation - Product Development
BIRT Committer
"Marc Leineweber" <marc.leineweber@icc-gmbh.de> wrote in message
news:e3cec9$djb$1@utils.eclipse.org...
> Hello,
>
> there once was a similar question to this group but nobody gave a hint to
a
> solution, so I try it again. Does anybody use XML datasource without
> performance problems, and if yes can provide an example report? I started
> with BIRT 2.0.1, but the problem is still present in 2.1rc2.
>
> I have a report basing on an XML datasource and three datasets defined for
> the source, my report contains two subreports. I have no big amount of
data
> rows (2 in the main dataset with 1 and 1 resp. 6 and 7 in the datasets for
> the subreport), but it takes 12 seconds to run and render the report. It
> seems to me that the XML file is parsed multiple times, so the question
is:
> is there a cache to activate or do I have to use a special XML structure
to
> avoid the performance problem?
>
> Thank you in advance, regards
>
> Marc
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: BIRT report with XML datasource: performance problem [message #159577 is a reply to message #159255] |
Tue, 09 May 2006 08:11 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: marc.leineweber.icc-gmbh.de
Hello Gary,
I created a new bugzilla bug (#140773) for the problem. I will try to
workaround using scripted data source, but I would rather use the XML file
as data source directly.
Regards,
Marc
"Gary Xue" <gxue@actuate.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:e3pbc8$mjj$1@utils.eclipse.org...
> Marc, can you please file a Bugzilla bug and attach the XML data and
> report
> design that's giving you the performance problem? BIRT engineers can then
> investigate.
>
> thanks,
>
> --
> Gary Xue
> Actuate Corporation - Product Development
> BIRT Committer
> "Marc Leineweber" <marc.leineweber@icc-gmbh.de> wrote in message
> news:e3cec9$djb$1@utils.eclipse.org...
>> Hello,
>>
>> there once was a similar question to this group but nobody gave a hint to
> a
>> solution, so I try it again. Does anybody use XML datasource without
>> performance problems, and if yes can provide an example report? I started
>> with BIRT 2.0.1, but the problem is still present in 2.1rc2.
>>
>> I have a report basing on an XML datasource and three datasets defined
>> for
>> the source, my report contains two subreports. I have no big amount of
> data
>> rows (2 in the main dataset with 1 and 1 resp. 6 and 7 in the datasets
>> for
>> the subreport), but it takes 12 seconds to run and render the report. It
>> seems to me that the XML file is parsed multiple times, so the question
> is:
>> is there a cache to activate or do I have to use a special XML structure
> to
>> avoid the performance problem?
>>
>> Thank you in advance, regards
>>
>> Marc
>>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03517 seconds
Home