Are the with/without optimize_for = SPEED flipped? It seems that what you suggest is that protobuf with optimize_for = SPEED is slower than without.
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 4:45 AM, TimYang <iso1...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I've made two similar tests in Java, comparing Thrift and Protocol > Buffers, and here is the result. > > Without optimize_for = SPEED > > Thrift Loop : 10,000,000 > Get object : 14,394msec > Serdes thrift : 37,671msec > Objs per second: 265,456 > Total bytes : 1,130,000,000 > > ProtoBuf Loop : 10,000,000 > Get object : 8,170msec > Serdes protobuf: 33,054msec > Objs per second: 302,535 > Total bytes : 829,997,866 > > With optimize_for = SPEED > > ProtoBuf Loop : 10,000,000 > Get object : 15,130msec > Serdes protobuf: 68,600msec > Objs per second: 145,772 > Total bytes : 829,996,683 > > Thrift Loop : 10,000,000 > Get object : 12,651msec > Serdes thrift : 36,904msec > Objs per second: 270,973 > Total bytes : 1,130,000,000 > > Details of the tests see > Round 1: > http://timyang.net/programming/thrift-protocol-buffers-performance-java/ > Round 2: > http://timyang.net/programming/thrift-protocol-buffers-performance-2/ > > On Mar 6, 3:37 pm, Dave Bailey <d...@daveb.net> wrote: > > FYI, I reran my comparison benchmark using optimize_for = SPEED, and > > got the following results: > > > > 1) dns.proto with key/value/first/last/type/ttl (mostly strings), > > 5,000 elements in DnsRecord: > > > > 0.019223 seconds to serialize as 658124 bytes with JSON::XS > > 0.0092 seconds to deserialize 658124 bytes with JSON::XS > > 0.018292 seconds to serialize as 414859 bytes with protobuf > > 0.006274 seconds to deserialize 414859 bytes with protobuf > > 0.028614 seconds to serialize as 692824 bytes with Storable > > 0.009033 seconds to deserialize 692824 bytes with Storable > > > > 2) dns.proto with sip/dip/sport/dport, 10,000 elements in DnsRecord: > > > > 0.003612 seconds to serialize as 300330 bytes with JSON::XS > > 0.004833 seconds to deserialize 300330 bytes with JSON::XS > > 0.002075 seconds to serialize as 85841 bytes with protobuf > > 0.000549 seconds to deserialize 85841 bytes with protobuf > > 0.013752 seconds to serialize as 340907 bytes with Storable > > 0.004676 seconds to deserialize 340907 bytes with Storable > > > > So, I guess PB isn't kidding around when we say optimize_for = SPEED. > > Straight across the board, faster than JSON::XS or Storable. It looks > > like for packing and unpacking messages with a lot of varint data, > > protobuf blows the doors off of the other Perl serialization > > mechanisms, but even for string-heavy messages, it packs at least as > > fast as the others, and unpacks significantly faster (probably due to > > the smaller message size where the message has a lot of small > > strings). > > > > In summary, I don't think there is any faster way to serialize > > structured data from Perl (as long as you're willing to write > > the .proto files and use protobuf-perlxs to compile them into Perl/XS > > extension modules, of course). > > > > -dave > > > > On Mar 5, 4:34 pm, Justin Azoff <justin.az...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Mar 4, 10:24 pm, David Anderson <d...@natulte.net> wrote: > > > > > > I think the major point to take away from the comparison is: use the > > > > correct tool for your needs. If you need backward/forward > > > > compatibility, heterogeneous versions of software interacting and > some > > > > structural validation (just structure, not talking about the higher > > > > level semantics of fields), PB/Thrift is what you need. If you don't > > > > care about the above points, by all means use json (and don't forget > > > > to get your web server to gzip traffic). > > > > > > - Dave > > > > > I definitely agree! I have been also been looking at this from > > > another angle: > > > Right now JSON is faster than protobuf (at least inpython), but > > > protobuf produces smaller output. Protobuf will only get faster, but > > > JSON can not get any smaller. Looking forward, protobuf definitely > > > has an advantage. > > > > > -- > > > - Justin > > > -- Alkis --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Protocol Buffers" group. To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
