Excel versus PDF Rendering

We have a report that's rendered to a printable form over 1000 times
in a span of 2 hours. We're in the process of replacing the server
because this workload has been hammering the machine and running the
RS services out of memory. I've added a metering component (the page
that redirects users to the report checks to see how many reports are
running and holds them at that page if it's over a set number). My
question is... for a fairly plain report (about 8 pages, mostly just
gridlines and shaded areas, with column and row header text. No
embedded images), which rendering performs better - PDF or Excel?
I've done some un-scientific research, and found that the CPU and
clock-time for each is pretty consistent, but that PDF might require
less memory per rendering report? Any feedback on this would be very
helpful.With SP1 of Reporting, the Algoritm for PDF Render are improved.
Con el Service Pack 1, el algoritmo de renderizacion de PDF fue mejorado.
John Bocachica
Colombia
"TShay" wrote:
> We have a report that's rendered to a printable form over 1000 times
> in a span of 2 hours. We're in the process of replacing the server
> because this workload has been hammering the machine and running the
> RS services out of memory. I've added a metering component (the page
> that redirects users to the report checks to see how many reports are
> running and holds them at that page if it's over a set number). My
> question is... for a fairly plain report (about 8 pages, mostly just
> gridlines and shaded areas, with column and row header text. No
> embedded images), which rendering performs better - PDF or Excel?
> I've done some un-scientific research, and found that the CPU and
> clock-time for each is pretty consistent, but that PDF might require
> less memory per rendering report? Any feedback on this would be very
> helpful.
>