Re: [xml] XML parser benchmarks

[Daniel Veillard <veillard redhat com>]

On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 09:06:31AM +1000, Eric Zurcher csiro au wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> A series of benchmarks comparing XML parsers is described in two
> articles at www.xml.com :
>
> http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2007/05/09/xml-parser-benchmarks-part-1.html
> http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2007/05/16/xml-parser-benchmarks-part-2.html
>
> Part 1 compares event-driven (SAX-like) parsers; part 2 compares object
> model (DOM-like) parsers. Quoting from the conclusions:
>
> (Part 1): "Overall the SAX-like implementation of LIBXML2 in C performs
> best in all benchmarks."
> (Part 2): "From the above presented benchmarks, LIBXML2 can be
> considered as the overall performance winner for object model parsers."
>
> So congratulations to Daniel and other contributors - libxml2 wins on
> all fronts!

  That's cool, though I'm always a bit vary of benchmarks, it's very easy
to get one thing wrong and generate inapropriate results, but it's still
nice. The point of expat missing that Michael raised is also spot on even
if expat doesn't really have a DOM (like) mode.
  Just as an example if you use xmlParseFile() instead of xmlReadFile(),
you use the older version of the parser which doesn't rely on dictionnaries
and the speed is quite lower, knowing this requires a bit more knowledge
than just what is needed to put a benchmark graph out ;-)

Daniel

-- 
Red Hat Virtualization group http://redhat.com/virtualization/
Daniel Veillard      | virtualization library  http://libvirt.org/
veillard redhat com  | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine  http://rpmfind.net/