pfd at pfdstudio.com
Thu Mar 3 22:07:10 CET 2011
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Martin Schröder <martin at oneiros.de> wrote:
> 2011/3/3 William Adams <will.adams at frycomm.com>:
> > Have you tried processing it w/o including the graphics?
> That would be my first guest. Try with the draft option...
(NB: Just replying to texhax, to avoid cross-posting issues I seem to have
I tried running 200 pages, with and without draft mode. Specifically, I put
draft mode on the graphicx package:
I used the --time-statistics option on the xelatex command to get timings.
The results are:
gross: 111634 ms, user mode: 17050 ms, kernel mode: 50778 ms, total: 67828
gross: 77941 ms, user mode: 12589 ms, kernel mode: 27300 ms, total: 39889
So the numbers are clearly better with draft on, but not by nearly enough to
account for the hours and hours this job ran. Does draft mode actually
eliminate access to the external PDF files each time they're included?
Jonathan Kew suggested putting each graphic in a \box, and simplying copying
the boxes where needed. Does that actually eliminate redundant access to
the external PDF files? That would be great.
Also, William Adams mentioned that calling \fontspec can be very expensive,
and I'm definitely doing that over and over again. I guess there's a way to
cache the font settings to eliminate a lot of that overhead when using the
same font repeatedly. (Unfortunately, when processing the XML, I have no
way of knowing which is the 'normal' font for the document.)
The Tech Curmudgeon
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the texhax