| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
  |
|
| XML parsers Vs TDS parsers |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| Monk |
 Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:49 pm Post subject: XML parsers Vs TDS parsers |
 |
|
Master
Joined: 21 Apr 2007
Posts: 282
|
Hi all,
Is it true that the message broker's built in XML parsers are faster than the usual TDS parser. I had seen this statement in one of the IBM presentations.
This would mean that all things beings equal one would select XML over TDS , even though TDS message consume less space.
I also did some tests to find out the truth in this and guess what it turned out to be true,But then again I would like to know from the community if I am right about this.
Thanks
_________________
Thimk |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| kimbert |
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 1:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 29 Jul 2003
Posts: 5542
Location: Southampton
|
| Quote: |
| Is it true that the message broker's built in XML parsers are faster than the usual TDS parser |
Unless you define your terms very carefully, the answer is undefined. TDS messages come in various styles, and so do XML messages. Some are easier to parse than others.
The facts are:
- XMLNS is a fast XML parser
- XMLNSC in v6.1 is a super-fast XML parser ( faster than XMLNS even when it is validating ),
- TDS from v6.0 onwards is a fast non-XML parser
| Quote: |
| I also did some tests to find out the truth in this and guess what it turned out to be true |
What did you test? Which Data Element Separation did you use for your TDS message? Which XML parser did you use? Did you enable validation in your XML parser?
| Quote: |
| This would mean that all things beings equal one would select XML over TDS |
Most users do not have a choice - the fornat of the input message is defined by another application. Even if you do have a choice, I do not recommend that you select your data format based on the relative performance of the parsers in v6.1. Having said that, I would probably choose XML if I had the choice. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Monk |
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 2:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 21 Apr 2007
Posts: 282
|
Thanks for the response.
What I tested?
I used a TDS message with tilde(~) as seperator and for the same data I converted it to xml format and then I ran the messages through the same flow(ofcourse using different input parsers but same flow logic) and I found out that simple XML parser was faster than the Custom TDS parser.
I tested in the following environment.
1. MB v 5
2. MQ v 5.3 ( Yes! some of us are still on the old versions because the customer doesn't want to upgrade).
and yes I do have a choice now given TDS And XML formats . I would choose XML for following reasons.
1. Applications interacting with MB use standard XML parsers.
2. Data validation is easier for other applications.
3. In my case I can't use Tilde in the data, which is currently causing problems so we had to fix the applications to take care of these issues.
Hope we can discuss more on this. 
_________________
Thimk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
