[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date]

Re: [xsl] Count - via database or xsl

Subject: Re: [xsl] Count - via database or xsl
From: "Mark Williams" <mark@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2004 14:46:23 -0000

Hi Andreas,

Thanks for the reply.

There's not really any code in mind at the moment.  We're just reaching a
point where we need to give serious consideration to this and I was
wondering what is the most efficient way of doing it.

>From your reply, it looks like you are suggesting is more efficient (which
is what I supposed I expected really) that the database application that
will produce the xml file should do the count for us.  Is that right?



----- Original Message -----
From: "Andreas L. Delmelle" <a_l.delmelle@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2004 1:39 PM
Subject: RE: [xsl] Count - via database or xsl

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mark Williams
> >
> <snip />
> > Occasionally we may need to test the size of the repeating data
> > outside of a for-each statement, by requesting a count of the
> > child nodes.
> > What we will usually want to know is whether there are 0 nodes
> > although sometimes we may need to know the actual number of the
> > count if there are more.
> > As the data is being passed via a database to the xml file, I
> > have assumed it would be much quicker for the database to do the
> > count for us.
> > Is this a correct assumption?  Is the xslt count a lot slower
> > than an efficient database application in this respect?
> >
> Hi,
> I just noticed this question has remained unanswered so far...
> Is it possible to repost the problem and include maybe some pseudocode to
> demonstrate what the actual concerns / desired results are?
> Anyway, your description above reminds me of a way I tackled a similar
> scenario, by specifying the count of the children (or any other type of
> descendant-nodes) as an attribute on the ancestor at XML creation time.
> could avoid a lot of node-counting while processing the document, just
> up the value from the attribute.
> Best way, I believe, is to use a combination of both, as the above
> could turn out to be unflexible in some cases.
> Hope this helps!
> Cheers,
> Andreas
>  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list

 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list

Current Thread