Axiom is heavy-weight and slow
------------------------------
Key: AXIS2-533
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2-533
Project: Apache Axis 2.0 (Axis2)
Type: Bug
Components: om
Versions: 0.95
Environment: n/a
Reporter: Dennis Sosnoski
In performance tests comparing Axiom with JDOM, dom4j, and Xerces DOM document
models Axiom was consistently both slower and bulkier than the other OMs when
the tree was expanded. Axiom delivered good performance for the initial "parse"
operation only by virtue of not building the tree. Here are some time
comparison figures for Axiom vs. dom4j on a fairly large SOAP response (from
the MS interop suite):
Running Axiom with 10 passes on file docs/xmlformatter.xml (274920 bytes):
Build mn=563 Build av=5110 Walk mn=33360 Walk av=60885 Build-Walk
mn=33923
Build-Walk av=65995 Write mn=31774 Write av=52782 Mod mn=5 Mod av=6
Running dom4j with 10 passes on file docs/xmlformatter.xml (274920 bytes):
Build mn=24816 Build av=28843 Walk mn=2839 Walk av=3055 Build-Walk
mn=27655
Build-Walk av=31898 Write mn=18866 Write av=19369 Mod mn=5 Mod av=6
The most interesting figures here are the Build-Walk time (sum of microseconds
for the initial parse operation plus walking the document tree, which forces
Axiom expansion) and the Write time. The average times are especially bad by
comparison with dom4j, which I'd suspect is caused by a lot of temporary object
creation. The write times may be at least partially caused by the
XMLStreamWriter API, since only Axiom uses this approach for output. Here are
memory comparisons:
Running Axiom memory test with 4 passes on file docs/xmlformatter.xml (274920
bytes):
Init mem=451872 Chg mem=928 First sz=15192 Avg sz=15261 Walked
sz=2071960
Avg+Walked sz=2087221
Running dom4j memory test with 4 passes on file docs/xmlformatter.xml (274920
bytes):
Init mem=829968 Chg mem=3120 First sz=1031760 Avg sz=971976 Walked sz=0
Avg+Walked sz=971976
The interesting figures here are the Avg+Walked sz values, which give the total
bytes of memory in use after parsing and walking the document representation.
Here are the same time and memory test results for a collection of smaller SOAP
documents:
Running Axiom with 10 passes on directory docs/soaps (30 files totaling 19407
bytes):
Build mn=13610 Build av=16897 Walk mn=2332 Walk av=10523 Build-Walk
mn=15942
Build-Walk av=27420 Write mn=16079 Write av=22565 Mod mn=9 Mod av=9
Running dom4j with 10 passes on directory docs/soaps (30 files totaling 19407
bytes):
Build mn=7507 Build av=12354 Walk mn=121 Walk av=134 Build-Walk
mn=7628
Build-Walk av=12488 Write mn=4226 Write av=5012 Mod mn=10 Mod av=10
Running Axiom memory test with 4 passes on directory docs/soaps (30 files
totaling 19407 bytes):
Init mem=456104 Chg mem=1640 First sz=451960 Avg sz=449760 Walked
sz=103520
Avg+Walked sz=553280
Running dom4j memory test with 4 passes on directory docs/soaps (30 files
totaling 19407 bytes):
Init mem=836392 Chg mem=7944 First sz=103824 Avg sz=33768 Walked sz=0
Avg+Walked sz=33768
Note the huge memory usage in this case. It appears that Axiom has a high
per-document memory overhead, perhaps caused by holding on to the
XMLStreamReader (which suggests the references to the reader should be cleared
as the tree is constructed, so that once the tree is complete the reader can be
garbage collected).
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
