Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
From: "Al B. Snell" <alaric@a...> > > 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. 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? James _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
|
