RE: [xml] 2.5.x performance vs. 2.4.24

        Sample document attached.  The command I've used for testing is:

        xmllint --timing --noout --memory ./test.xml



-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Veillard [mailto:veillard redhat com] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 11:07 AM
To: Grant Goodale
Cc: xml gnome org
Subject: Re: [xml] 2.5.x performance vs. 2.4.24

On Wed, Aug 13, 2003 at 10:31:36AM -0700, Grant Goodale wrote:
      I require thread support, so recompiling without them isn't an 
option.  Nevertheless, I got the same results after rebuilding without

  libxml2 used not the be configured with threads by default.

thread support.  Any other thoughts?  Is there a public ftp site where

I can post the document for other people to try this?

  gzip and mail as an attachment, I don't allow upload on my FTP servers
anymore :-) . gzipped the 3mb file will certainly reduce to something
okay by mail. Make a gzipped tar if other resources are needed to
reproduce the problem.

      Another data point - the time between brk() calls in 2.4.24
running this test is approx. 7 ms.  In 2.5.8, it's approx. 100ms. Have

the built-in memory management functions changed much between the two 

  Well the memory management is delegated to the C (the pthread one on
Linux actually) library. If not configured with threads the old version
would pick up glibc allocation function, the new one ill use pthread
allocation function. On AS 2.1 the pthread memory allocator is slower
than the glibc one, but this can't account for a 100x slowdown anyway !


Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat Network
veillard redhat com  | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit | Rpmfind RPM search engine

Attachment: test.tgz
Description: test.tgz

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]