Lists Home |
Date Index |
On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 01:52:48PM +0100, Nicolas LEHUEN wrote:
> Like all benchmark made by any given "vendor" (the quotes are here because
> the different APIs are free), this should be taken with a pinch of salt. It
> is still interesting to read, though.
Did they give the input for their tests ? I don't think so. What would
become really fun is to see the result of processing those data without
having to run through the Java stuff. I.e. reporting side by side what
MSXML or libxml2/libxslt results would be. It's a long time since any
XSLTMark  benchmark had been produced ...
Benchmarks are statistic, and hence show only a few facets of the
real object, in this case the goal seems to be more of comparing various
processing costs in the Java environment than to make a roundup of
to set of tools available, but still releasing the sources would allow
to scope those result better and give more weight to their analysis. As
they state they are to "be considered as micro-benchmarks".
Also any "single shot" run in a Java based environment doesn't give
good results (time to find the "Hot Spot" needing compilation) this is
interestingly pointed explicitely shown in their "Comparing Different
JVM Versions" part.
Daniel Veillard | Red Hat Network https://rhn.redhat.com/
firstname.lastname@example.org | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/