Dear Indra, as nobody answered yet I can give you our experience but please understand that this might be biased as I’m a committer at PDFBox and the result is based on the document content we are merging.
For a project (a banking customer) we needed to post process (add paper handling marks) and merge large batches of documents (up to 5000) with the merged PDF containing up to 30000 pages. For various reasons an Open Source library had to be chosen but we did some testing using closed source products. At the time we did the tests PDFBox was 5-10% slower than iText and produced larger files (10-15% larger). Both were considerably slower than the fastest closed source product (PDFLib) we tested which also produced smallert files. The tests were done approx. 2 years ago and both PDFBox and iText moved on. I don’t have newer numbers for you. We did choose iText but replaced that approx. half a year ago with PDFBox. That decision was made mainly because of the Apache license and as PDFBox’s functionality and performance was sufficient. We are not using the PDFBox MergerUtility but a custom one which is tailored to the content of the documents we are merging - e.g. there is no need to merge AcroForm content but we do merge bookmarks. I’d recommend that you give both iText and PDFBox a try - it shouldn’t take you more than an hour to have a simple test program for both to run against a testbed. With kind regards Maruan Am 27.08.2014 um 14:30 schrieb Malle, Indra <[email protected]>: > Hi, > > I want to know performance issue between PDFBOX and iText. Which is the > better for performance while pdf files merging . can anyone help me? > > With kind regards > Indra Kumar Malle > [email protected] > > > The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential. > If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all > copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; > and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that > any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by > persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you.
