mirror of git://git.psyc.eu/libpsyc
We need more XMPP-free comparisons
This commit is contained in:
psyc://psyced.org/~lynX
parent
d40fa8c398
commit
da08b760f0
|
|
@ -3,17 +3,67 @@
|
|||
In this document we present the results of performance benchmarks
|
||||
of libpsyc compared with libjson-glib and libxml2.
|
||||
|
||||
* Procedure
|
||||
We'll use typical messages from the XMPP ("stanzas" in Jabber
|
||||
lingo) and compare them with equivalent JSON encodings,
|
||||
* PSYC, JSON, XML Syntax Benchmarks
|
||||
First we look at the mere performance of the PSYC syntax
|
||||
compared to equivalent XML and JSON encodings. We'll
|
||||
look at actual XMPP messaging later.
|
||||
|
||||
** User Profile
|
||||
In this test we'll compare the efficiency of the three
|
||||
syntaxes at serializing a typical user data base
|
||||
storage information. Let's start with XML:
|
||||
|
||||
#+INCLUDE: packets/user_profile.xml src xml
|
||||
|
||||
In JSON this could look like this:
|
||||
|
||||
#+INCLUDE: packets/user_profile.json src js
|
||||
|
||||
Here's a way to model this in PSYC:
|
||||
|
||||
#+INCLUDE: packets/user_profile.psyc src psyc
|
||||
|
||||
** A message with JSON-unfriendly characters
|
||||
This message contains some characters which are
|
||||
impractical to encode in JSON. Let's see how much
|
||||
performance impact this has.
|
||||
|
||||
#+INCLUDE: packets/json-unfriendly.xml src xml
|
||||
#+INCLUDE: packets/json-unfriendly.json src js
|
||||
#+INCLUDE: packets/json-unfriendly.psyc src psyc
|
||||
|
||||
** A message with XML-unfriendly characters
|
||||
Same test with characters which aren't practical
|
||||
in the XML syntax.
|
||||
|
||||
#+INCLUDE: packets/xml-unfriendly.xml src xml
|
||||
|
||||
** A message with PSYC-unfriendly strings
|
||||
PSYC prefixes data with length as soon as it
|
||||
exceeds certain sizes or contains certain strings.
|
||||
In the case of short messages this is less
|
||||
efficient than scanning the values without lengths.
|
||||
Also, lengths are harder to edit by hand.
|
||||
|
||||
#+INCLUDE: packets/psyc-unfriendly.xml src xml
|
||||
#+INCLUDE: packets/psyc-unfriendly.json src js
|
||||
#+INCLUDE: packets/psyc-unfriendly.psyc src psyc
|
||||
|
||||
** Packets containing binary data
|
||||
We'll use a generator of random binary data to
|
||||
see how well the formats behave with different
|
||||
sizes of data. We'll consider 7000 as a possible
|
||||
size of an icon, 70000 for an avatar, 700000
|
||||
for a photograph, 7000000 for a piece of music,
|
||||
70000000 for a large project and
|
||||
700000000 for the contents of a CD.
|
||||
|
||||
* PSYC vs XMPP Protocol Benchmarks
|
||||
|
||||
These tests use typical messages from the XMPP ("stanzas" in
|
||||
Jabber lingo) and compare them with equivalent JSON encodings,
|
||||
verbose and compact PSYC formats.
|
||||
|
||||
In some cases we will additionally compare PSYC packets to
|
||||
a more efficient XML encoding based on PSYC methods, to have
|
||||
a more accurate comparison of the actual PSYC and XML
|
||||
syntaxes, rather than the protocol structures of PSYC and XMPP.
|
||||
|
||||
* The Benchmarks
|
||||
** A presence packet
|
||||
Since presence packets are by far the dominant messaging content
|
||||
in the XMPP network, we'll start with one of them.
|
||||
|
|
@ -80,37 +130,6 @@ We'll use the latter here:
|
|||
|
||||
#+INCLUDE: packets/activity.psyc src psyc
|
||||
|
||||
** A message with JSON-unfriendly characters
|
||||
#+INCLUDE: packets/json-unfriendly.xml src xml
|
||||
#+INCLUDE: packets/json-unfriendly.json src js
|
||||
#+INCLUDE: packets/json-unfriendly.psyc src psyc
|
||||
|
||||
** A message with XML-unfriendly characters
|
||||
#+INCLUDE: packets/xml-unfriendly.xml src xml
|
||||
|
||||
** A message with PSYC-unfriendly strings
|
||||
#+INCLUDE: packets/psyc-unfriendly.xml src xml
|
||||
#+INCLUDE: packets/psyc-unfriendly.json src js
|
||||
#+INCLUDE: packets/psyc-unfriendly.psyc src psyc
|
||||
|
||||
** A packet containing a JPEG photograph
|
||||
... TBD ...
|
||||
|
||||
** A random data structure
|
||||
In this test we'll not consider XMPP at all and simply compare the
|
||||
efficiency of the three syntaxes at serializing a typical user data base
|
||||
storage information. We'll again start with XML:
|
||||
|
||||
#+INCLUDE: packets/user_profile.xml src xml
|
||||
|
||||
In JSON this would look like this:
|
||||
|
||||
#+INCLUDE: packets/user_profile.json src js
|
||||
|
||||
Here's a way to model this in PSYC:
|
||||
|
||||
#+INCLUDE: packets/user_profile.psyc src psyc
|
||||
|
||||
* Results
|
||||
|
||||
Parsing time of 1 000 000 packets in milliseconds:
|
||||
|
|
@ -118,10 +137,18 @@ Parsing time of 1 000 000 packets in milliseconds:
|
|||
| input: | PSYC | | JSON | | | XML | |
|
||||
| parser: | strlen | libpsyc | json-c | json-glib | libxml sax | libxml | rapidxml |
|
||||
|-----------+--------+---------+--------+-----------+------------+--------+----------|
|
||||
| user prof | 55 | 608 | 4715 | 17468 | 7350 | 12377 | 2477 |
|
||||
|-----------+--------+---------+--------+-----------+------------+--------+----------|
|
||||
| / | < | > | < | > | < | | > |
|
||||
|
||||
Pure syntax comparisons above, protocol performance comparisons below:
|
||||
|
||||
| input: | PSYC | | JSON | | | XMPP | |
|
||||
| parser: | strlen | libpsyc | json-c | json-glib | libxml sax | libxml | rapidxml |
|
||||
|-----------+--------+---------+--------+-----------+------------+--------+----------|
|
||||
| presence | 30 | 246 | 2463 | 10197 | 4997 | 7557 | 1719 |
|
||||
| chat msg | 41 | 320 | | | 5997 | 9777 | 1893 |
|
||||
| activity | 42 | 366 | 4666 | 16846 | 13357 | 28858 | 4419 |
|
||||
| user prof | 55 | 608 | 4715 | 17468 | 7350 | 12377 | 2477 |
|
||||
|-----------+--------+---------+--------+-----------+------------+--------+----------|
|
||||
| / | < | > | < | > | < | | > |
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue