Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy)
From: Daniel Kulp <dkulp@apache.org>
To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Subject: Re: Remove Stax API or wstx-asl ?
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 23:44:50 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.1 (Linux/2.6.33-gentoo; KDE/4.4.1; x86_64; ; )
Cc: Ivan <xhhsld@gmail.com>
References: <45f744e41003241844t40578152u63731804f5958c25@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <45f744e41003241844t40578152u63731804f5958c25@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201003242344.51088.dkulp@apache.org>

On Wednesday 24 March 2010 9:44:12 pm Ivan wrote:
> Hi,
>     Just trying the latest Geronimo 3.0 build, get a CNF exception for the
> XMLInputFactory, seems that wstx-asl shipped is not a bundle.
>     I am thinking that since JRE 1.6 contains the API and the default
> implementation, do we still need to ship another one ?

Well, I would say get rid of stax-api, but keep wstx.   I think the 4.x 
versions of woodstox are bundles.  If not, ServiceMix has bundles for them.

The parser in the JDK sucks from a performance standpoint.   We recently tried 
to use the JDK parser in CXF and the complete test run took nearly 25% longer.   
Adding woodstox back in brought it right back down to the normal times.   
Testing on "real" web services backed that up.   

Basically, the in JDK Stax parser will work, but woodstox is so much faster.  
If you aren't doing anything performance critical with XML, not using woodstox 
might be OK.   


-- 
Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org
http://dankulp.com/blog