Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1axymK-0005Yu-Ql for pgsql-docs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 04 May 2016 15:31:56 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1axymK-0005Yb-Bf for pgsql-docs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 04 May 2016 15:31:56 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1axymJ-0005YJ-UU for pgsql-docs@postgresql.org; Wed, 04 May 2016 15:31:55 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1axymF-0002d0-8N for pgsql-docs@postgresql.org; Wed, 04 May 2016 15:31:55 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u44FVmwf008040; Wed, 4 May 2016 11:31:48 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Alvaro Herrera cc: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=FCrgen?= Purtz , pgsql-docs@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Docbook 5.x In-reply-to: <20160504151848.GA100795@alvherre.pgsql> References: <20160504151848.GA100795@alvherre.pgsql> Comments: In-reply-to Alvaro Herrera message dated "Wed, 04 May 2016 12:18:48 -0300" Date: Wed, 04 May 2016 11:31:48 -0400 Message-ID: <8039.1462375908@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Pg-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-docs Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-docs-owner@postgresql.org Alvaro Herrera writes: > The dsl toolchain has a "make html" format which creates the index and a > "make draft" that doesn't. You timed the former only. What's the > timing for an equivalent of "make draft" in the xslt chain? If it > exists and is short enough, it seems acceptable to me that the complete > (with index) build takes ~4x as long as today; the draft timing is more > critical, I would think. I would object to that; I don't ever use "make draft", in part because I frequently want to look at whether the index entries look sensible. Also, as you noted, the time savings is pretty minimal at present. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs