[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: Robb Shecter <shecter@darmstadt.gmd.de>
- To: xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
- Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 15:55:38 +0200
"Joshua E. Smith" wrote:
> The speed increase you saw...
Hmm... I read the article and checked out the perl script: It looks to me like
there's a problem with how the test was conducted. Maybe I don't
understand what's going on, but this looks obvious:
The tests were apparently done with the unix "time" command, by shelling out, and
starting a new process for each document. This means that the interpreter-based
languages get hit with two disadvantages: 1) They're penalized for VM startup and
shutdown times. 2) After parsing a document, all loaded objects, references, and knowledge
gained are thrown away, and can't be used for the next document.
To me, this is a valid issue because the test environment wasn't a good approximation of
real-world use: The test most closely modeled a CGI environment, which is a dying
programming style.
My guess is that if the test more closely modelled real-world use: a server that,
in its lifetime, parses many documents, then the results may not have been so
exagerated. I'm thinking of something like Servlets in the Java world, mod_perl in the Perl
world, etc. The interpreters would still have lost, but maybe it wouldn't have been so
extreme.
- Robb
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@ic.ac.uk)
|