Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: David Megginson <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: email@example.com
- Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 20:38:58 -0700 (PDT)
> I can see that on a Pentium 300 you wouldn't notice the function
> call overhead/stack framing for recursive processing. Thanks. My
> own experience using the Java XML frameworks is that they are slow.
Hmm -- they are somewhat slower than Expat, but that's because they're
running tight code loops in a virtual machine. Still, when I was
testing AElfred on a 166MHZ Pentium NT box back in late 1997, it could
parse about 1MB/second with a good VM and a JIT, and the other good
XML parsers are comparable in speed.
Granted, Expat (with memory-mapped I/O) is about 10 times as fast as
the faster Java-based XML parser, but that's a very misleading figure:
in fact, the actual parsing usually occupies only a small amount of
the time required for XML processing -- most of the time is usually
taken up by your code that actually does something with the XML.
Let's assume, then, that XML parsing occupies 10% of your
application's overhead. Even if you could build a parser that is
1000% faster, you'd still gain only 9% in actual execution speed.
All the best,
David Megginson firstname.lastname@example.org
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:email@example.com
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:email@example.com the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org)