You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@santuario.apache.org by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com> on 2005/01/11 14:28:24 UTC
Re: Apache XML Security 1.2 for Java
Can you please post your test.xml as well?
thanks,
dims
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 18:31:18 +0500, Egor Pervuninski <pe...@quorus.ru> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Recently I tried to upgrade my project to use new Apache XML Security 1.2 for Java
> and found that now the library does c14n much MUCH more slowly than it was with 1.1.
>
> Here is a simple test:
>
> import javax.xml.parsers.DocumentBuilder;
> import javax.xml.parsers.DocumentBuilderFactory;
>
> import org.apache.commons.lang.time.StopWatch;
> import org.apache.xml.security.c14n.Canonicalizer;
> import org.w3c.dom.Document;
> import org.xml.sax.InputSource;
>
> public class Test {
> private final static int REPEAT = 1000;
>
> private StopWatch timer = new StopWatch();
> private Canonicalizer canon = Canonicalizer.getInstance(Canonicalizer.ALGO_ID_C14N_OMIT_COMMENTS);
> private Document document;
>
> public Test(String file) throws Exception {
> DocumentBuilderFactory factory = DocumentBuilderFactory.newInstance();
> factory.setNamespaceAware(true);
> factory.setValidating(false);
> DocumentBuilder builder = factory.newDocumentBuilder();
> document = builder.parse(new InputSource(file));
> }
>
> public void runTest() throws Exception {
> timer.start();
> for (int i = 0; i < REPEAT; i++) {
> canon.canonicalizeSubtree(document);
> }
> timer.stop();
> System.out.println("time spent " + String.valueOf(timer.getTime()) + " ms");
> }
>
> public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
> org.apache.xml.security.Init.init();
> Test test = new Test(args[0]);
> test.runTest();
> }
> }
>
> Just drop commons-lang-2.0.jar, commons-logging.jar, xercesImpl.jar, xml-apis.jar and xmlsec.jarto the
> classpath and run java Test File.xml.
>
> Version 1.1 output: time spent 952 ms
> Version 1.2 output: time spent 29172 ms
>
> Where is the catch?
>
> Regards,
> Egor Pervuninski
> egor {dot} pervuninski {at} gmail {dot} com
>
--
Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/
Re: Struts build
Posted by Martin Cooper <mf...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 09:43:12 +0530, Rajaneesh
<ra...@slk-soft.com> wrote:
> Hey!
>
> I was intersted in looking the source code of struts. So I decided to
> download it from http://cvs.apache.org/builds/jakarta-struts/nightly/src/
>
> However I notices that the size of the source code has almost increased by 3
> times in
> latest source code all of the sudden. Is there anything wrong with the
> source code? Or are
> these enhanced functionalities?
You've picked an unfortunate time to start looking at the code. ;-)
The repository is going through a good deal of change right now, as we
pull apart what was one monolithic project into multiple independently
releasable subprojects. What you are seeing is an intermediate state
in which the nightly build process is to some extent waiting for the
new structure to stabilise.
Given the current state of things, you might want to check out the
1.2.x branch (named STRUTS_1_2_BRANCH) from the repository instead,
or, if you are interested in specific pieces of the latest of Struts,
check out the subproject(s) for those from the trunk in SVN.
(By the way, browser access to the source code is not working at the
moment. It has been temporarily disabled due to an infrastructure
issue, so you'll need to check out the code using a Subversion client.
If you're using Windows, I would recommend TortoiseSVN if you don't
already have a client.)
--
Martin Cooper
> Regards
> Rajaneesh
>
> Snapshot from the site!
>
> struts-src-20050115.tar.gz 15-Jan-2005 06:27 5.6M Automated test
> builds
> struts-src-20050115.zip 15-Jan-2005 06:36 7.6M Automated test
> builds
> struts-src-20050116.tar.gz 16-Jan-2005 21:27 22M Automated test
> builds
> struts-src-20050116.zip 16-Jan-2005 21:59 27M Automated test
> builds
> struts-src-20050117.tar.gz 17-Jan-2005 06:24 22M Automated test
> builds
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Apache XML Security 1.2 for Java
Posted by Egor Pervuninski <pe...@quorus.ru>.
Hello Raul,
I have build CVS version and it works fine. My results are:
using 1.1: 901ms
using cvs: 320ms
Three times faster than 1.1 and three times faster than IBM XML Security
Suite according to my tests.
Thanks Raul!!!
Regards,
Egor Pervuninski
egor {dot} pervuninski {at} gmail {dot} com
Raul Benito wrote:
> At least, fixed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> It was driving me mad. I was thinking of saying: OK, I have do test
> with hundreds of XML files, and the 1.2 approach was speedier than
> the 1.1 approach, but your test is clear and we need to throw all the
> 1.2 version and begin with the 1.1 and tar myself, and wear a paper
> bag over the head all my life.
>
> But, I'd found the error after using jrat profiler: your test was only
> spending 6% of the time in the xml-sec code, the rest was spent
> somewhere else, and that place was toByteArray() inside
> ByteArrayOutputStream. So with this date I made my simple
> OwnByteArrayOutputStream, and no matter how big I made the byte array
> I always got an OutOfBounds exception. Then I remember that I made
> some changes in order to reduce memory consumption that avoids the
> reuse of canocilizer as it does not reset the ByteArrayOS. I'll fix
> this problem(one line change) and I got these new figures:
>
> Your test case, in my machine:
> using 1.1: 1116 ms
> using CVS HEAD: 341 ms
>
> A nice improvement, isn't it?
>
> You can test your self obtaining & compiling the CVS HEAD version
> library or just changing your test to not reuse Canonicalizer object.
>
> Regards,
>
> Raul
> http://r-bg.com
>
> p.s. Before finding the error, I was thinking that the
> NameSpaceSymbTable was the main culprit of the slow down. And I was
> thinking in rewriting it in order to not use HashMap and use a simple
> String[], it will improve the things if there are few concurrent
> different prefix mappings.
> Has anybody found more than 10 xmlns:prefix mappings in a document??????
> I haven't, but I don't know. So please share your knoledge.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 11:14:15 +0500, Egor Pervuninski <pe...@quorus.ru> wrote:
>
>>Hello Raul,
>>
>>I am using Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional 5.00.2195 with
>>ServicePack 4 and "Russian" locale.
>>I have Celeron 1200MHz machine with 512Mb RAM.
>>
>>I have tried to run java with -server option using two different JREs
>>but results were the same.
>>
>>Here is the output of java -version for j2sdk 1.5.0:
>>java version "1.5.0"
>>Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition (build 1.5.0-b64)
>>Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM (build 1.5.0-b64, mixed mode)
>>
>>Results with -client:
>>1.1: time spent 921 ms
>>1.2: time spent 27710 ms
>>Results with -server:
>>1.1: time spent 2374 ms
>>1.2: time spent 26438 ms
>>
>>Here is the output of java -version for j2sdk 1.4.2:
>>java version "1.4.2_03"
>>Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition (build 1.4.2_03-b02)
>>Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM (build 1.4.2_03-b02, mixed mode)
>>
>>Results with -client:
>>1.1: time spent 901 ms
>>1.2: time spent 23014 ms
>>Results with -server:
>>1.1: time spent 2013 ms
>>1.2: time spent 23014 ms
>>
>>I will try to profile the library in my spare time and post the result.
>>
>>Regards,
>>Egor Pervuninski
>>egor {dot} pervuninski {at} gmail {dot} com
>>
>>Raul Benito wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hi Egor,
>>>
>>>
>>> First of all sorry for not answering your request sooner. Regarding
>>>your problem, it seems that the way we transform the stream to UTF8 in
>>>1.2(the library do the conversion itself) is slower in your case to
>>>the way it was done 1.1(we use classes given by the SDK). This is
>>>weird because, I made a lot of test regarding it and was always faster
>>>doing in the library that letting the work for the API. I will
>>>investigate this a little more, but I´ll need more information
>>>regarding your runtime: What JRE are you using, in what OS, in what
>>>locale, and of course are you testing with JIT enable(i.e. are you
>>>using -server or -client).
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>
>>>Raul
>>>http://r-bg.com
>>>
>>>On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 18:38:40 +0500, Egor Pervuninski <pe...@quorus.ru> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hello,
>>>>
>>>>Sure, here it is.
>>>>
>>>>## Davanum Srinivas : Tue, 11 Jan 2005 08:28:24 -0500
>>>>
>>>>DS> Can you please post your test.xml as well? thanks, dims
>>>>DS>
>>>>DS> On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 18:31:18 +0500, Egor Pervuninski
>>>>DS> <pe...@quorus.ru> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>Hello,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Recently I tried to upgrade my project to use new Apache XML
>>>>>>Security 1.2 for Java and found that now the library does c14n much
>>>>>>MUCH more slowly than it was with 1.1.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Here is a simple test:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>import javax.xml.parsers.DocumentBuilder; import
>>>>>>javax.xml.parsers.DocumentBuilderFactory;
>>>>>>
>>>>>>import org.apache.commons.lang.time.StopWatch; import
>>>>>>org.apache.xml.security.c14n.Canonicalizer; import
>>>>>>org.w3c.dom.Document; import org.xml.sax.InputSource;
>>>>>>
>>>>>>public class Test { private final static int REPEAT = 1000;
>>>>>>
>>>>>>private StopWatch timer = new StopWatch(); private Canonicalizer
>>>>>>canon =
>>>>>>Canonicalizer.getInstance(Canonicalizer.ALGO_ID_C14N_OMIT_COMMENTS);
>>>>>>private Document document;
>>>>>>
>>>>>>public Test(String file) throws Exception { DocumentBuilderFactory
>>>>>>factory = DocumentBuilderFactory.newInstance();
>>>>>>factory.setNamespaceAware(true); factory.setValidating(false);
>>>>>>DocumentBuilder builder = factory.newDocumentBuilder(); document =
>>>>>>builder.parse(new InputSource(file)); }
>>>>>>
>>>>>>public void runTest() throws Exception { timer.start(); for (int i
>>>>>>= 0; i < REPEAT; i++) { canon.canonicalizeSubtree(document); }
>>>>>>timer.stop(); System.out.println("time spent " +
>>>>>>String.valueOf(timer.getTime()) + " ms"); }
>>>>>>
>>>>>>public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
>>>>>>org.apache.xml.security.Init.init(); Test test = new Test(args[0]);
>>>>>>test.runTest(); } }
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Just drop commons-lang-2.0.jar, commons-logging.jar,
>>>>>>xercesImpl.jar, xml-apis.jar and xmlsec.jarto the classpath and run
>>>>>>java Test File.xml.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Version 1.1 output: time spent 952 ms Version 1.2 output: time
>>>>>>spent 29172 ms
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Where is the catch?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Regards, Egor Pervuninski egor {dot} pervuninski {at} gmail {dot}
>>>>>>com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>DS> --
>>>>DS> Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/
>>>>DS>
>>>>
>>>>Regards,
>>>>Egor Pervuninski
>>>>egor {dot} pervuninski {at} gmail {dot} com
Re: Apache XML Security 1.2 for Java
Posted by Raul Benito <ra...@gmail.com>.
At least, fixed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It was driving me mad. I was thinking of saying: OK, I have do test
with hundreds of XML files, and the 1.2 approach was speedier than
the 1.1 approach, but your test is clear and we need to throw all the
1.2 version and begin with the 1.1 and tar myself, and wear a paper
bag over the head all my life.
But, I'd found the error after using jrat profiler: your test was only
spending 6% of the time in the xml-sec code, the rest was spent
somewhere else, and that place was toByteArray() inside
ByteArrayOutputStream. So with this date I made my simple
OwnByteArrayOutputStream, and no matter how big I made the byte array
I always got an OutOfBounds exception. Then I remember that I made
some changes in order to reduce memory consumption that avoids the
reuse of canocilizer as it does not reset the ByteArrayOS. I'll fix
this problem(one line change) and I got these new figures:
Your test case, in my machine:
using 1.1: 1116 ms
using CVS HEAD: 341 ms
A nice improvement, isn't it?
You can test your self obtaining & compiling the CVS HEAD version
library or just changing your test to not reuse Canonicalizer object.
Regards,
Raul
http://r-bg.com
p.s. Before finding the error, I was thinking that the
NameSpaceSymbTable was the main culprit of the slow down. And I was
thinking in rewriting it in order to not use HashMap and use a simple
String[], it will improve the things if there are few concurrent
different prefix mappings.
Has anybody found more than 10 xmlns:prefix mappings in a document??????
I haven't, but I don't know. So please share your knoledge.
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 11:14:15 +0500, Egor Pervuninski <pe...@quorus.ru> wrote:
> Hello Raul,
>
> I am using Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional 5.00.2195 with
> ServicePack 4 and "Russian" locale.
> I have Celeron 1200MHz machine with 512Mb RAM.
>
> I have tried to run java with -server option using two different JREs
> but results were the same.
>
> Here is the output of java -version for j2sdk 1.5.0:
> java version "1.5.0"
> Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition (build 1.5.0-b64)
> Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM (build 1.5.0-b64, mixed mode)
>
> Results with -client:
> 1.1: time spent 921 ms
> 1.2: time spent 27710 ms
> Results with -server:
> 1.1: time spent 2374 ms
> 1.2: time spent 26438 ms
>
> Here is the output of java -version for j2sdk 1.4.2:
> java version "1.4.2_03"
> Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition (build 1.4.2_03-b02)
> Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM (build 1.4.2_03-b02, mixed mode)
>
> Results with -client:
> 1.1: time spent 901 ms
> 1.2: time spent 23014 ms
> Results with -server:
> 1.1: time spent 2013 ms
> 1.2: time spent 23014 ms
>
> I will try to profile the library in my spare time and post the result.
>
> Regards,
> Egor Pervuninski
> egor {dot} pervuninski {at} gmail {dot} com
>
> Raul Benito wrote:
>
> >Hi Egor,
> >
> >
> > First of all sorry for not answering your request sooner. Regarding
> >your problem, it seems that the way we transform the stream to UTF8 in
> >1.2(the library do the conversion itself) is slower in your case to
> >the way it was done 1.1(we use classes given by the SDK). This is
> >weird because, I made a lot of test regarding it and was always faster
> >doing in the library that letting the work for the API. I will
> >investigate this a little more, but I´ll need more information
> >regarding your runtime: What JRE are you using, in what OS, in what
> >locale, and of course are you testing with JIT enable(i.e. are you
> >using -server or -client).
> >
> >Regards,
> >
> >Raul
> >http://r-bg.com
> >
> >On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 18:38:40 +0500, Egor Pervuninski <pe...@quorus.ru> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Hello,
> >>
> >>Sure, here it is.
> >>
> >>## Davanum Srinivas : Tue, 11 Jan 2005 08:28:24 -0500
> >>
> >>DS> Can you please post your test.xml as well? thanks, dims
> >>DS>
> >>DS> On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 18:31:18 +0500, Egor Pervuninski
> >>DS> <pe...@quorus.ru> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>>Hello,
> >>>>
> >>>>Recently I tried to upgrade my project to use new Apache XML
> >>>>Security 1.2 for Java and found that now the library does c14n much
> >>>>MUCH more slowly than it was with 1.1.
> >>>>
> >>>>Here is a simple test:
> >>>>
> >>>>import javax.xml.parsers.DocumentBuilder; import
> >>>>javax.xml.parsers.DocumentBuilderFactory;
> >>>>
> >>>>import org.apache.commons.lang.time.StopWatch; import
> >>>>org.apache.xml.security.c14n.Canonicalizer; import
> >>>>org.w3c.dom.Document; import org.xml.sax.InputSource;
> >>>>
> >>>>public class Test { private final static int REPEAT = 1000;
> >>>>
> >>>>private StopWatch timer = new StopWatch(); private Canonicalizer
> >>>>canon =
> >>>>Canonicalizer.getInstance(Canonicalizer.ALGO_ID_C14N_OMIT_COMMENTS);
> >>>>private Document document;
> >>>>
> >>>>public Test(String file) throws Exception { DocumentBuilderFactory
> >>>>factory = DocumentBuilderFactory.newInstance();
> >>>>factory.setNamespaceAware(true); factory.setValidating(false);
> >>>>DocumentBuilder builder = factory.newDocumentBuilder(); document =
> >>>>builder.parse(new InputSource(file)); }
> >>>>
> >>>>public void runTest() throws Exception { timer.start(); for (int i
> >>>>= 0; i < REPEAT; i++) { canon.canonicalizeSubtree(document); }
> >>>>timer.stop(); System.out.println("time spent " +
> >>>>String.valueOf(timer.getTime()) + " ms"); }
> >>>>
> >>>>public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
> >>>>org.apache.xml.security.Init.init(); Test test = new Test(args[0]);
> >>>>test.runTest(); } }
> >>>>
> >>>>Just drop commons-lang-2.0.jar, commons-logging.jar,
> >>>>xercesImpl.jar, xml-apis.jar and xmlsec.jarto the classpath and run
> >>>>java Test File.xml.
> >>>>
> >>>>Version 1.1 output: time spent 952 ms Version 1.2 output: time
> >>>>spent 29172 ms
> >>>>
> >>>>Where is the catch?
> >>>>
> >>>>Regards, Egor Pervuninski egor {dot} pervuninski {at} gmail {dot}
> >>>>com
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>DS> --
> >>DS> Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/
> >>DS>
> >>
> >>Regards,
> >>Egor Pervuninski
> >>egor {dot} pervuninski {at} gmail {dot} com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Struts build
Posted by Rajaneesh <ra...@slk-soft.com>.
Hey!
I was intersted in looking the source code of struts. So I decided to
download it from http://cvs.apache.org/builds/jakarta-struts/nightly/src/
However I notices that the size of the source code has almost increased by 3
times in
latest source code all of the sudden. Is there anything wrong with the
source code? Or are
these enhanced functionalities?
Regards
Rajaneesh
Snapshot from the site!
struts-src-20050115.tar.gz 15-Jan-2005 06:27 5.6M Automated test
builds
struts-src-20050115.zip 15-Jan-2005 06:36 7.6M Automated test
builds
struts-src-20050116.tar.gz 16-Jan-2005 21:27 22M Automated test
builds
struts-src-20050116.zip 16-Jan-2005 21:59 27M Automated test
builds
struts-src-20050117.tar.gz 17-Jan-2005 06:24 22M Automated test
builds
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Apache XML Security 1.2 for Java
Posted by Egor Pervuninski <pe...@quorus.ru>.
Hello Raul,
I am using Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional 5.00.2195 with
ServicePack 4 and "Russian" locale.
I have Celeron 1200MHz machine with 512Mb RAM.
I have tried to run java with -server option using two different JREs
but results were the same.
Here is the output of java -version for j2sdk 1.5.0:
java version "1.5.0"
Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition (build 1.5.0-b64)
Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM (build 1.5.0-b64, mixed mode)
Results with -client:
1.1: time spent 921 ms
1.2: time spent 27710 ms
Results with -server:
1.1: time spent 2374 ms
1.2: time spent 26438 ms
Here is the output of java -version for j2sdk 1.4.2:
java version "1.4.2_03"
Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition (build 1.4.2_03-b02)
Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM (build 1.4.2_03-b02, mixed mode)
Results with -client:
1.1: time spent 901 ms
1.2: time spent 23014 ms
Results with -server:
1.1: time spent 2013 ms
1.2: time spent 23014 ms
I will try to profile the library in my spare time and post the result.
Regards,
Egor Pervuninski
egor {dot} pervuninski {at} gmail {dot} com
Raul Benito wrote:
>Hi Egor,
>
>
> First of all sorry for not answering your request sooner. Regarding
>your problem, it seems that the way we transform the stream to UTF8 in
>1.2(the library do the conversion itself) is slower in your case to
>the way it was done 1.1(we use classes given by the SDK). This is
>weird because, I made a lot of test regarding it and was always faster
>doing in the library that letting the work for the API. I will
>investigate this a little more, but I´ll need more information
>regarding your runtime: What JRE are you using, in what OS, in what
>locale, and of course are you testing with JIT enable(i.e. are you
>using -server or -client).
>
>Regards,
>
>Raul
>http://r-bg.com
>
>On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 18:38:40 +0500, Egor Pervuninski <pe...@quorus.ru> wrote:
>
>
>>Hello,
>>
>>Sure, here it is.
>>
>>## Davanum Srinivas : Tue, 11 Jan 2005 08:28:24 -0500
>>
>>DS> Can you please post your test.xml as well? thanks, dims
>>DS>
>>DS> On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 18:31:18 +0500, Egor Pervuninski
>>DS> <pe...@quorus.ru> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>Hello,
>>>>
>>>>Recently I tried to upgrade my project to use new Apache XML
>>>>Security 1.2 for Java and found that now the library does c14n much
>>>>MUCH more slowly than it was with 1.1.
>>>>
>>>>Here is a simple test:
>>>>
>>>>import javax.xml.parsers.DocumentBuilder; import
>>>>javax.xml.parsers.DocumentBuilderFactory;
>>>>
>>>>import org.apache.commons.lang.time.StopWatch; import
>>>>org.apache.xml.security.c14n.Canonicalizer; import
>>>>org.w3c.dom.Document; import org.xml.sax.InputSource;
>>>>
>>>>public class Test { private final static int REPEAT = 1000;
>>>>
>>>>private StopWatch timer = new StopWatch(); private Canonicalizer
>>>>canon =
>>>>Canonicalizer.getInstance(Canonicalizer.ALGO_ID_C14N_OMIT_COMMENTS);
>>>>private Document document;
>>>>
>>>>public Test(String file) throws Exception { DocumentBuilderFactory
>>>>factory = DocumentBuilderFactory.newInstance();
>>>>factory.setNamespaceAware(true); factory.setValidating(false);
>>>>DocumentBuilder builder = factory.newDocumentBuilder(); document =
>>>>builder.parse(new InputSource(file)); }
>>>>
>>>>public void runTest() throws Exception { timer.start(); for (int i
>>>>= 0; i < REPEAT; i++) { canon.canonicalizeSubtree(document); }
>>>>timer.stop(); System.out.println("time spent " +
>>>>String.valueOf(timer.getTime()) + " ms"); }
>>>>
>>>>public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
>>>>org.apache.xml.security.Init.init(); Test test = new Test(args[0]);
>>>>test.runTest(); } }
>>>>
>>>>Just drop commons-lang-2.0.jar, commons-logging.jar,
>>>>xercesImpl.jar, xml-apis.jar and xmlsec.jarto the classpath and run
>>>>java Test File.xml.
>>>>
>>>>Version 1.1 output: time spent 952 ms Version 1.2 output: time
>>>>spent 29172 ms
>>>>
>>>>Where is the catch?
>>>>
>>>>Regards, Egor Pervuninski egor {dot} pervuninski {at} gmail {dot}
>>>>com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>DS> --
>>DS> Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/
>>DS>
>>
>>Regards,
>>Egor Pervuninski
>>egor {dot} pervuninski {at} gmail {dot} com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Re: Apache XML Security 1.2 for Java
Posted by Raul Benito <ra...@gmail.com>.
Hi Egor,
First of all sorry for not answering your request sooner. Regarding
your problem, it seems that the way we transform the stream to UTF8 in
1.2(the library do the conversion itself) is slower in your case to
the way it was done 1.1(we use classes given by the SDK). This is
weird because, I made a lot of test regarding it and was always faster
doing in the library that letting the work for the API. I will
investigate this a little more, but I´ll need more information
regarding your runtime: What JRE are you using, in what OS, in what
locale, and of course are you testing with JIT enable(i.e. are you
using -server or -client).
Regards,
Raul
http://r-bg.com
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 18:38:40 +0500, Egor Pervuninski <pe...@quorus.ru> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Sure, here it is.
>
> ## Davanum Srinivas : Tue, 11 Jan 2005 08:28:24 -0500
>
> DS> Can you please post your test.xml as well? thanks, dims
> DS>
> DS> On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 18:31:18 +0500, Egor Pervuninski
> DS> <pe...@quorus.ru> wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> Recently I tried to upgrade my project to use new Apache XML
> >> Security 1.2 for Java and found that now the library does c14n much
> >> MUCH more slowly than it was with 1.1.
> >>
> >> Here is a simple test:
> >>
> >> import javax.xml.parsers.DocumentBuilder; import
> >> javax.xml.parsers.DocumentBuilderFactory;
> >>
> >> import org.apache.commons.lang.time.StopWatch; import
> >> org.apache.xml.security.c14n.Canonicalizer; import
> >> org.w3c.dom.Document; import org.xml.sax.InputSource;
> >>
> >> public class Test { private final static int REPEAT = 1000;
> >>
> >> private StopWatch timer = new StopWatch(); private Canonicalizer
> >> canon =
> >> Canonicalizer.getInstance(Canonicalizer.ALGO_ID_C14N_OMIT_COMMENTS);
> >> private Document document;
> >>
> >> public Test(String file) throws Exception { DocumentBuilderFactory
> >> factory = DocumentBuilderFactory.newInstance();
> >> factory.setNamespaceAware(true); factory.setValidating(false);
> >> DocumentBuilder builder = factory.newDocumentBuilder(); document =
> >> builder.parse(new InputSource(file)); }
> >>
> >> public void runTest() throws Exception { timer.start(); for (int i
> >> = 0; i < REPEAT; i++) { canon.canonicalizeSubtree(document); }
> >> timer.stop(); System.out.println("time spent " +
> >> String.valueOf(timer.getTime()) + " ms"); }
> >>
> >> public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
> >> org.apache.xml.security.Init.init(); Test test = new Test(args[0]);
> >> test.runTest(); } }
> >>
> >> Just drop commons-lang-2.0.jar, commons-logging.jar,
> >> xercesImpl.jar, xml-apis.jar and xmlsec.jarto the classpath and run
> >> java Test File.xml.
> >>
> >> Version 1.1 output: time spent 952 ms Version 1.2 output: time
> >> spent 29172 ms
> >>
> >> Where is the catch?
> >>
> >> Regards, Egor Pervuninski egor {dot} pervuninski {at} gmail {dot}
> >> com
> >>
> DS> --
> DS> Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/
> DS>
>
> Regards,
> Egor Pervuninski
> egor {dot} pervuninski {at} gmail {dot} com
>
>
>
Re: Apache XML Security 1.2 for Java
Posted by Egor Pervuninski <pe...@quorus.ru>.
Hello,
Sure, here it is.
## Davanum Srinivas : Tue, 11 Jan 2005 08:28:24 -0500
DS> Can you please post your test.xml as well? thanks, dims
DS>
DS> On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 18:31:18 +0500, Egor Pervuninski
DS> <pe...@quorus.ru> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Recently I tried to upgrade my project to use new Apache XML
>> Security 1.2 for Java and found that now the library does c14n much
>> MUCH more slowly than it was with 1.1.
>>
>> Here is a simple test:
>>
>> import javax.xml.parsers.DocumentBuilder; import
>> javax.xml.parsers.DocumentBuilderFactory;
>>
>> import org.apache.commons.lang.time.StopWatch; import
>> org.apache.xml.security.c14n.Canonicalizer; import
>> org.w3c.dom.Document; import org.xml.sax.InputSource;
>>
>> public class Test { private final static int REPEAT = 1000;
>>
>> private StopWatch timer = new StopWatch(); private Canonicalizer
>> canon =
>> Canonicalizer.getInstance(Canonicalizer.ALGO_ID_C14N_OMIT_COMMENTS);
>> private Document document;
>>
>> public Test(String file) throws Exception { DocumentBuilderFactory
>> factory = DocumentBuilderFactory.newInstance();
>> factory.setNamespaceAware(true); factory.setValidating(false);
>> DocumentBuilder builder = factory.newDocumentBuilder(); document =
>> builder.parse(new InputSource(file)); }
>>
>> public void runTest() throws Exception { timer.start(); for (int i
>> = 0; i < REPEAT; i++) { canon.canonicalizeSubtree(document); }
>> timer.stop(); System.out.println("time spent " +
>> String.valueOf(timer.getTime()) + " ms"); }
>>
>> public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
>> org.apache.xml.security.Init.init(); Test test = new Test(args[0]);
>> test.runTest(); } }
>>
>> Just drop commons-lang-2.0.jar, commons-logging.jar,
>> xercesImpl.jar, xml-apis.jar and xmlsec.jarto the classpath and run
>> java Test File.xml.
>>
>> Version 1.1 output: time spent 952 ms Version 1.2 output: time
>> spent 29172 ms
>>
>> Where is the catch?
>>
>> Regards, Egor Pervuninski egor {dot} pervuninski {at} gmail {dot}
>> com
>>
DS> --
DS> Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/
DS>
Regards,
Egor Pervuninski
egor {dot} pervuninski {at} gmail {dot} com