Re: [xml] xmlbench Benchark results...

[Daniel Veillard <veillard redhat com>]

On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 04:23:45PM -0800, Sean Chittenden wrote:
> I apologize if others have seen this, but:
>
> http://xmlbench.sourceforge.net/results/benchmark/index.html
>
> libxml performs quite well in the stack up.  Congrats to the libxml
> developers.  I wonder how Oracle can be orders of magnitude faster
> though in several of the benchmarks.  They must be doing something

  Which ones ? It's seems they are a bit faster on DOM processing,
but I don't see orders of magnitude.

> fundamentally different under the hood when it comes to generating
> messages, DOM manipulation, or validation.  Then again, things are
> really quick at that level and libxslt is the fastest out there it
> looks like.

  In all fairness it doesn't include any Java nor MS stack.

> How does libxml stack up to MS's XML library?  -sc

  I can't tell, but from what I gathered:
    - libxml might be faster for parsing
    - MS generate more compatc documents
    - MS XSLT engine seems faster overall
    - but libxslt is slightly faster for DocBook XSLt processing

but I have no precise idea.
I think I could speed up parsing speed and a number of small 
operations by using alloca for some tasks and possibly interning 
some strings at the parser level. I will probably go over another
profiling work if I have some time after Relax NG and Schemas work.

Daniel

-- 
Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat Network https://rhn.redhat.com/
veillard redhat com  | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/