ws-sandesha-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Amila Suriarachchi <amilasuriarach...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Performance Comparison
Date Mon, 03 May 2010 08:19:52 GMT
Is (or was) there any reason to Axiom to come up with an new API rather than
using DOM API?
I was thinking that Dom does not support differed building and that seems to
be wrong.

There are some axis2 specific methods to get under line xml stream etc...
But they would have added by
extending the DOM API.

thanks,
Amila.


On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Dennis Sosnoski <dms@sosnoski.com> wrote:

> Whoops, meant to have this in my first response...
>
>
> Andreas Veithen wrote:
>
>> Each of the two approaches (porting WSS4J to Axiom / building a new
>> optimized Axiom+DOM implementation) have their pros and cons and I
>> think there is enough room for the two. They could even be
>> complementary provided that the new Axiom+DOM implementation has a
>> lower memory footprint and better performance.
>>
>>
>
> I can't really see much of a pro in porting WSS4J to Axiom. This would mean
> either forking the code, with the associated maintenance issues, or
> deliberately choosing to lower WSS4J's performance with other applications
> just so that Axis2 improves (and creating an Axiom dependency for everyone
> else using WSS4J).
>
> Implementing a DOM interface usable by WSS4J on top of a modified Axiom
> seems like a better choice, so that Axis2 can avoid unnecessary conversions
> and boost its performance without hurting other users of WSS4J. Or instead
> using a simpler version of build-on-demand than that implemented by Axiom,
> as discussed in the earlier reply.
>
>  - Dennis
>
>
>


-- 
Amila Suriarachchi
WSO2 Inc.
blog: http://amilachinthaka.blogspot.com/

Mime
View raw message