[Python-Dev] Integrating Expat

[M.-A. Lemburg]

Skip Montanaro wrote:
> 
>     mal> I think that the sgmlop design is sufficiently simple and easy to
>     mal> extend to make it a good candidate for inclusion. Sure, we'll get
>     mal> bug reports, but why not add sgmlop marked as experimental to the
>     mal> core in order to get it stabilized and bug-fixed ?!
> 
> I would be happy to sgmlop added to the core.  The xmlrpclib encoding and
> decoding do need some sort of C-based acceleration to be usable:
> 
>     % python testxmlrpc.py
>     testing with xmlrpclib 0.9.8
>     using FastParser
>     415 dumps per second
>     106 loads per second
>     disabling fast parsers in xmlrpclib
>     using SlowParser
>     412 dumps per second
>     16.1 loads per second
> 
> FWIW, the xmlrpclib delivered with Python is substantially slower dumping
> data than the 0.9.x versions that have been around awhile, though its
> decoding performance degrades less without sgmlop.  Compare the above with
> this:
> 
>     % PYTHONPATH=~/misc/python/python2 python testxmlrpc.py
>     testing with xmlrpclib 1.0b3
>     using SgmlopParser
>     229 dumps per second
>     94.3 loads per second
>     disabling fast parsers in xmlrpclib
>     using ExpatParser
>     231 dumps per second
>     76.8 loads per second
> 
> I haven't had or taken the time to investigate the difference yet.

Hmm, you cannot really compare these numbers though, since the two
runs use two different sets of parsers. Have you checked using
SgmlopParser with the 0.9.8 version of xmlrpclib ?

There's also a project on SF called py-xmlrpc which uses a C
implementation as basis and is said to be much faster than 
xmlrpclib (at least that's what they quote on their web-page).

-- 
Marc-Andre Lemburg
CEO eGenix.com Software GmbH
______________________________________________________________________
Consulting & Company:                           http://www.egenix.com/
Python Software:                        http://www.lemburg.com/python/