Best of chrome-pdf, phantom-pdf and electron-pdf recipes
-
Hi,
I have tested with all these recipes and found that phantom-pdf rendering times are quite less when compared to other two. That means phantom-pdf performs better than other two for same set of data and on the same system configuration. We have used 4 cores and 16 GB RAM.
The configurations i used for all 3 recipes are:
"electron-pdf": {
"strategy": "electron-ipc",
"numberOfWorkers": 2,
"pingTimeout": 6000000,
"timeout": 6000000
}
"templatingEngines": {
"strategy": "http-server",
"numberOfWorkers": 2,
"forkOptions": {
"execArgv": ["--max-old-space-size=6096"]
}
}
"phantom-pdf": {
"numberOfWorkers": 2,
"timeout": 6000000,
"strategy": "phantom-server"
}
"chrome-pdf": {
"strategy": "chrome-pool",
"numberOfWorkers": 2
}Which according to you is the best report rendering recipe that we can use?
In one of the responses
https://forum.jsreport.net/topic/1559/electron-pdf-issue-in-jsreport/5, chrome-pdf is suggested. But between chrome-pdf and phantom-pdf which would be the better recipe?Thank you in advance
-
You can use what works for you the best.
However chrome-pdf recipe should be the first choice for sure. That is why it is the default one.
The problem with phantomjs is that its development was suspended.
-
I am analysing the performance of phantomjs and headless chrome and in general opinion is that "headless chrome" performs faster with less memory. But the testing i have done shows opposite. Any clarification on this would be helpful....
-
Hi Jan_blaha,
In general, Chrome-pdf is supposed to have good performance or response times but we are not seeing that. For us Phantom-pdf is giving good numbers. Just want to know if we are missing anything.
-
We don't have a manual or information in which cases the chrome can be slower than phantom.
It is probably very specific.
