Re: [Boost-users] How to improve property_tree performance

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] How to improve property_tree performance
From: OvermindDL1 (overminddl1_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-10-15 18:36:12

On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 2:31 AM, Bo Jensen <jensen.bo_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 6:54 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 2:47 AM, Bo Jensen <jensen.bo_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 8:33 AM, Sebastian Redl
>>> <sebastian.redl_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>> On 13.10.2010 10:15, Bo Jensen wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I tried that, it was only slightly faster. I also tried to do a bunch
>>>>> of independent trees and then merge them later, but still same speed.
>>>>> Is it correct, that you can not choose the underlying storage method
>>>>> or preallocate some space ? In my case I know exactly the sizes of
>>>>> each tree and number of items.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No, because of the way PTree is structured at the high level (nesting trees
>>>> where each branch can be treated as an independent tree), providing generic
>>>> allocator support is impractical. Internally, a tree node consists of its
>>>> local value and a node-based container of children, so preallocation through
>>>> an interface would only be able to provide storage for that particular node,
>>>> and would also require a special allocator.
>>>> However, if you want to try the performance effect of using a stateless
>>>> Boost Pool allocator, I believe all you have to do is add it to the
>>>> base_container typedef in
>>>> boost/property_tree/detail/ptree_implementation.hpp, near the top. See that
>>>> big multi_index_container? That's the storage for child nodes. If you give
>>>> it an alternative (stateless!) allocator, it will be used.
>>>>
>>>> Sebastian
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Boost-users mailing list
>>>> Boost-users_at_[hidden]
>>>> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for the input, I will try it out. Otherwise I might use the
>>> serialization with xml, since my usage is so simple.
>>
>> You could just try using Spirit/Karma for that, there is about nothing
>> faster then those for input/output streaming. Â You will have to define
>> your own format (xml is *easy* to emulate it in, see its examples,
>> already done), but it would certainly be faster then any other method
>> if you have a real need for speed.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Boost-users mailing list
>> Boost-users_at_[hidden]
>> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users
>>
>
> Thanks for the replies, I ended up using pugixml instead for the speed
> crucial part.

As stated Spirit/Karma will still outperform that if you do not mind
writing it out yourself.  :)