There is some overhead in simply instantiating a parser, though it's not
huge. Last time I did timings to this effect, I think I got something like
100ms just to instantiate the parser, that being on a somewhat aging PC,
and several versions back of Xerces.
|---------+----------------------------->
| | "Jeff Greif" |
| | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| | nceton.edu> |
| | |
| | 03/21/2003 03:35 |
| | PM |
| | Please respond to |
| | xerces-j-user |
| | |
|---------+----------------------------->
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|
|
| To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
|
| cc:
|
| Subject: Re: reusing parsers
|
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Actually, if you look at the CachingParserPool source code (at least in
2.2.1), you find that it's not parsers that are reused, but the symbol
table
and grammar pool, I think. But parsers suppposedly can be reused and I'm
trying to find out if it's worth the trouble.
Jeff
----- Original Message -----
From: Christopher Ebert
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 11:56 AM
Subject: RE: reusing parsers
I haven't run into this myself, but given that parser pools have come up a
number of times in discussions of performance, I'd guess the basic answer
is
'yes, it makes a difference'. I don't know the specifics about what you
need
to do to re-use, though...
HTH
Chris
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
