Re: performance test suite? (was: Re: Using W3C Regular Expressions)

["Anders W. Tell" <opensource@toolsmiths.se>]

James Strachan wrote:

From: "Al B. Snell" <alaric@alaric-snell.com>
> > I suggest you include a dimension for documents
> > with single namespaces and multiple namespaces as
> > well.  Some serious minds think that impacts
> > parser performance as well and is posed as
> > part of the RDF-over-XMLSchemas arguments.
>
> Really? Ok, I'll put that in too. Thanks!
>
> http://love.warhead.org.uk/~alaric/XML-vs-Binary-benchamarks.html
>
> (in progress :-)

I've not managed to track the whole text-v-binary discussions -  I find it
hard to find the time to keep up with xml-dev these days :-(.
Is your intention to build a performance testing framework to demonstrate
the performance difference of binary v. text XML parsers?

If so, I've been meaning to investigate the relative performances of a
variety of SAX parsers (crimson, Xerces1/2, Aelfred), both with and without
validation along with some other configurations like turning on and off of
String "interning". Plus I'd like to test the performance of a variety of
tree object models too such as DOM (crimson, Xerces 1/2), dom4j, Electric,
JDOM etc.

Interesting, a measurement of code and library size would be interesting
too.

 
It might be a good idea to combine our efforts into the same benchmarking
suite so (say) it would be easy to compare a binary SAX driver fares against
the best text SAX drivers etc.

My idea was to create a SourceForge project for the benchmark suite.
Does this seem of interest or am I way off where you're at?

Im interested to join too.


I think Curt Arnold and David Brownell already have started

with their project "XML Conformance Testing "

<http://sourceforge.net/projects/xmlconf/>


/anders

-- 
/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
/  Financial Toolsmiths AB            / 
/  Anders W. Tell                     /
/ email: <anderst@toolsmiths.se>      /
/ WWW:      /
/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/