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: Wolfgang Hoschek <whoschek AT lbl.gov>
  • To: Christof <csad7 AT t-online.de>
  • Cc: xom-interest AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [XOM-interest] XOM performance compared
  • Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 14:21:50 -0700

Wrt. parsing, I just ran the ParseLoop.java performance measurement program included in dom4j-1.6.1 on my usual testbed (includes xerces-2.7.0). Overall, dom4j/SAX/xerces seems to be roughly 1.5 times slower than xom-CVS on parsing/SAX/xerces, and dom4j/XPP pull parser is 5 times slower than dom4j/SAX/xerces.

As always, this is just a small little data point, and it may or may not apply to any given app use case, so please don't conclude too much from that, and please don't start flame wars.

Wolfgang.

On Jul 23, 2005, at 3:37 AM, 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).

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?

thanks
Christof


Wolfgang Hoschek wrote:

Would be interesting. I'm not aware of such a thorough study. Having said that, I'd be somewhat surprised if they were more efficient. It probably also depends on the main usage pattern.
Wolfgang.
On Jul 22, 2005, at 2:04 AM, csad7 AT t-online.de wrote:

hello,
are there any performance comparisons between lets say XOM and
dom4j/JDOM etc?

I try to persuade some colleges at work to use XOM instead of dom4j
(which has bitten some projects with some nasty details mostly issues
about whitespace handling) but they question the performance of XOM.

Googling did not bring any real help, so I'd think I'll ask here...

thanks a lot
christof
_______________________________________________
XOM-interest mailing list
XOM-interest AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/xom-interest







Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page