Re: SOAP performance data and open benchmarks

> We developed the gSOAP toolkit for C and C++ at Florida State University and
> tested several SOAP packages to compare ease-of-use and performance. The
> investigation is part of a federally funded research project. The tests were
> subject to change as SOAP toolkits were maturing and so we didn't publish
> the results of this investigation yet.

When will the source code for the latest-and-greatest benchmarks be released?

> it is not always possible to achieve equal or better performance than Java
RMI, because
> SOAP/XML is bandwidth demanding. Sure, if you discount communication
> latencies than SOAP/XML could be just as fast compared to Java RMI.

Research at Rutgers measured the latency of Java RMI, CORBA, and various
implementations of SOAP (Microsoft, Apache SOAP, SOAP::Lite, etc.). RMI and
CORBA were in the ballpark with TCP setup time. For a mix of tests, the SOAP
implementations were slower by factor of 12 to 239:
http://www.caip.rutgers.edu/TASSL/Papers/p2p-p2pws02-soap.pdf

> However, certain types of messages such as arrays of floats introduce a
significant
> overhead in communication.

This paper discussed RMI and SOAP benchmarks using linked links and serialized
double arrays:
http://www.sc2000.org/techpapr/papers/pap.pap261.pdf


> Here is a paper that compares performance and scalabolity of CGI vs.
> stand-alone vs. Java RMI and compares the speed of different encodings:
> http://www.cs.fsu.edu/~engelen/soappaper.html

Thanks, Robert.

You can read messages from the SOAP archive, unsubscribe from SOAP, or subscribe to other
DevelopMentor lists at http://discuss.develop.com.