Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

xom-interest - Re: [XOM-interest] XOM performance compared

xom-interest AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: XOM API for Processing XML with Java

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Elliotte Harold <elharo AT metalab.unc.edu>
  • To: Christof <csad7 AT t-online.de>
  • Cc: xom-interest AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [XOM-interest] XOM performance compared
  • Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 07:32:02 -0400

Christof wrote:
My co-worker did a very small test saying XOM 1.0 did take about 10% more time to load/build/etc the document he tested it with. Of course this is not a real performance test but thats what he went with.
I too doubt dom4j will be much faster but they are accustomed to it and there should be not disadvantages by changing (advantages I see in XOMs focus on correctnes. Simplicity for me is a big advantage too but I myself did not use dom4j before).

That wouldn't surprise me. XOM does quite a bit more work when building than most parsers do.

But I was wondering if XOM 1.1 will be a lot faster in some areas after the discussions about performance optimizations on this list. Being only a moderate I was not following everything in detail but had the impression 1.1 should be much more optimized, is that true? When is 1.1 expected as a final version?

I think it will be quite a bit faster, maybe as much as a factor of two on average so if it was only 10% slower before, it should really smoke the competition now. :-) API and feature-wise 1.1 is essentially complete. I'm just tweaking the performance as time permits. My plan is to release 1.1 shortly after xml:id goes to final rec, since that's the only unfinished standard 1.1 depends on.

--
Elliotte Rusty Harold elharo AT metalab.unc.edu
XML in a Nutshell 3rd Edition Just Published!
http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xian3/
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0596007647/cafeaulaitA/ref=nosim




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page