On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 07:50, Amila Suriarachchi <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 2:57 AM, Andreas Veithen <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> And here is the answer to a question asked by Amila about this: >> >> > Have you measure the performance factor? >> > One of the problems I see with the current DOOM implementations is it is >> > very in efficient in performance wise. >> >> Eventually the only real performance test is to run some scenarios on >> Rampart with the standard Axiom implementation and then to rerun the >> same scenarios with the Axiom+DOM implementation built on top of DDOM. >> The Axiom implementation is work in progress and there is not enough >> of it yet to run Axis2. There are also some cleanups and changes in >> Axis2, Axiom and Rampart that are required to make this work. >> >> There are actually three ways DDOM can potentially improve the overall >> Rampart performance: >> * It avoids conversions between Axiom and DOM. >> * A couple of months ago I did some performance tests with CXF (with >> Sun's SAAJ implementation vs. the SAAJ implementation built with DDOM) >> and Dennis Sosnoski's signature and encryption scenarios. For these >> scenarios, deferred building is not relevant because WSS4J always >> reads the entire message. Nevertheless the results suggested a slight >> performance improvement (although it is difficult to isolate the >> contribution of the object model because the timings are dominated by >> the cryptography stuff). Since Sun's SAAJ implementation extends >> Xerces, this would mean that DDOM is as least as good (if not better) >> than Xerces performance-wise. Therefore it is probably better than >> DOOM. > > Does the DDOM gives the better or equal performance with CXF (with existing > DOM) for the bench mark given here[1]. > If so I think adding Axiom support to DDOM is the best chance of fixing > rampart perf issue.
Yes, these are the test scenarios that I mentioned in item 2. For these scenarios, CXF+DDOM has a slightly (few percents) better performance than CXF+Sun-SAAJ. > thanks, > Amila. > > [1] http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jws14/index.html > > >> * There is some particularly inefficient code in xmlsec, namely the >> part where it extracts the base64 encoded content, decrypts it and >> replaces it with the parsed XML. That is due to some intrinsic >> limitations in the JAXP and DOM APIs. This could be avoided by taking >> advantage of some of the advanced features in DDOM. Since only a >> particular piece of code in xmlsec has this issue, this can be >> achieved without the need to rewrite the entire lib and without >> dropping support for standard DOM. >> >> Andreas >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > > > > -- > Amila Suriarachchi > WSO2 Inc. > blog: http://amilachinthaka.blogspot.com/ > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
