• From: Michael Kay <mike@s...>
• To: Rick Jelliffe <rjelliffe@a...>
• Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2022 10:13:56 +0000

> 
> For point of argument, let's say that an attribute that is an ID or Key will likely be indexed (xsl:key or some hash table or btree or list or whatever) by any process complex enough that we really care about memory usage (given that a process may be short on memory because we need expedition.)
> 

You're obviously right: all performance measurements suffer from the problem that data for one workload doesn't necessarily extrapolate to another.

Personally I would expect that for most documents, indexes aren't going to make a big difference (unless you're doing full text indexing), but I can't quantify "most", so that's a fairly meaningless statement.

Michael Kay
Saxonica

• References:
  • Why does XML call them "attributes" and not name-value pairs?
    • From: Roger L Costello <costello@m...>
  • Re: Why does XML call them "attributes" and notname-value pairs?
    • From: "Liam R. E. Quin" <liam@f...>
  • RE: Why does XML call them "attributes" and not name-valuepairs?
    • From: "Brutzman, Donald (Don) (CIV)" <brutzman@n...>
  • Re: Why does XML call them "attributes" and not name-value pairs?
    • From: Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@g...>
  • Re: Why does XML call them "attributes" and not name-value pairs?
    • From: Kit <kit.saels@g...>
  • Re: Why does XML call them "attributes" and not name-value pairs?
    • From: Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@g...>
  • Re: Why does XML call them "attributes" and not name-value pairs?
    • From: Kit <kit.saels@g...>
  • Re: Why does XML call them "attributes" and not name-value pairs?
    • From: Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@g...>
  • Re: Why does XML call them "attributes" and not name-value pairs?
    • From: Rick Jelliffe <rjelliffe@a...>