Can XML-RPC performance be improved?
siona at chiark.greenend.org.uk
Thu Mar 23 15:29:53 CET 2006
<skip at pobox.com> wrote:
> Steve> I suppose there *was* a good reason for using XML-RPC in the
> Steve> first place?
>I don't know about the OP, but in my case it was a drop-dead simple
>cross-language RPC protocol.
I am the OP and *I* don't know if there was a good reason for using
XML-RPC in the first place. It's someone else's code, and they're
no longer with the company. I can see it being justifiable at the
time: (a) single developer writing both server and client doesn't
need to think about the implemention of their communication (b) in
the future there may be other clients in other languages (as above)
and (c) up until recently, the volume of data being passed back and
forth wasn't high enough for XML parsing performance to be of much
significance. I've known XML parsing makes XML-RPC suck since, er,
before XML-RPC was invented. (At about the same time that SOAP was
being developed, we developed a prototype component system using
XML for message passing, then threw it away when it was clear that
the XML parsing was a major bottleneck.)
\S -- siona at chiark.greenend.org.uk -- http://www.chaos.org.uk/~sion/
___ | "Frankly I have no feelings towards penguins one way or the other"
\X/ | -- Arthur C. Clarke
her nu becomeþ se bera eadward ofdun hlæddre heafdes bæce bump bump bump
More information about the Python-list