Ok, thanks for the info. I guess a Numeric Range Index https://github.com/BaseXdb/basex/issues/236is required to address this.
/Andy
On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 7:23 PM, Christian Grün christian.gruen@gmail.comwrote:
Hi Andy,
my assumption is that the doc() gives you better results because it creates a main-memory representation of the document, which can generally be processed faster than a persistent database representation.
If I remember right, the XMark queries 11 and 12 contain a non-equi-join, which lead to frequent lookups of the same data, and for which BaseX provides no optimization yet. All other XMark queries are probably evaluated faster on the database, in particular when larger XMark instances are used for testing.
Hope this helps, feel free to ask for more, Christian ___________________________
2013/7/2 Andy Bunce bunce.andy@gmail.com:
Hi,
Looking to compare the performance of BaseX on a number of machines I
have
been running the Xmark queries [1]. Query 11 seems to be one that causes
the
most stress. I then compared the performance executing query 11 against
an
xml file on the filesystem compared with importing it into a database and timing the query against the database:
- Running from a database 36sec
- Running from a file 9secs
The xml was generated using xmlgen /f 0.1 /o test.xml
This does not seem right to me. I was expecting the database to be
faster.
/Andy [1] http://www.ins.cwi.nl/projects/xmark/Assets/xmlquery.txt
BaseX-Talk mailing list BaseX-Talk@mailman.uni-konstanz.de https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk