How much faster was the JAXP one ? And using which implementation ? On 9/20/07, netflexity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Even though JAXP-based XSLT component was faster and more efficient than > SAXON for XSLT 1.0, SAXON was not the cause of the memory leak. It was a > custom ContentEnricher (that supports InOut exchanges) that was not > issueing done(targetME). So, please be aware of this when creating custom > service engines or binding components. > > > > netflexity wrote: > > > > My guess would be the use of Templates. > > > > > > netflexity wrote: > >> > >> Have anybody experienced memory leaks with XSLT service units? We are > >> running into out of memory errors during load testing. If comment out > >> just XSLT conversion, everything performs excellent. > >> > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/SAXON%28XSLT%29-SU-memory-leak-tf4429185s12049.html#a12799678 > Sent from the ServiceMix - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >
-- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet ------------------------ Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
