Chris Withers wrote: > Malthe Borch wrote: >> We use a custom parser based on ``xml.parsers.sax`` –– it's in >> ``chameleon.core.etree``. >> >>> How do you guys to speed profiling? Would be interested to see how the speed >>> compares with and without lxml and across various templating engines... >> The ``lxml`` library is only used in the compilation process; it's not >> used at all while rendering. > > Interesting, but the bit of my question is still unanswered: > > Are there any speed-comparison suites for templating engines out there? > Would be really interesting to compare them all...
In addition to what others mentioned: http://blog.hannosch.eu/2008/07/project-messerschmidt-vs-nkotb.html http://code.google.com/p/spitfire/ I haven't updated either of them in a while, but both use the bigtable test approach. For a more realistic scenario, you can look at http://blog.hannosch.eu/2009/03/can-i-make-my-plone-3x-faster.html The Plone 3.2 with ZPT versus Plone 3.3 with Chameleon numbers (Chameleon is the only speed relevant difference here) suggest that in real world templates, switching to Chameleon over ZPT might give something like a 0.5x to 2x speed increase. Given that the bigtable benchmark suggests 10x to 20x the speed, you can make your own conclusions what the real world performance for other templating languages looks like. Hanno _______________________________________________ Repoze-dev mailing list Repoze-dev@lists.repoze.org http://lists.repoze.org/listinfo/repoze-dev
