- From: Aleksey Sanin <aleksey@aleksey.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 18:10:53 -0700
- To: Christian Geuer-Pollmann <geuer-pollmann@nue.et-inf.uni-siegen.de>
- Cc: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
Christian,
Thanks a lot for the examples! On my Athlon 900MHz I have folllowing results
(everything compiled in debug mode w/o optimization):
apachesample_xfilter2_doc_1.xml: Executed 100 tests in 110 msec
apachesample_xfilter2_doc_2.xml: Executed 100 tests in 330 msec
apachesample_xfilter2_doc_3.xml: Executed 100 tests in 300 msec
apachesample_xfilter2_doc_4.xml: Executed 100 tests in 350 msec
apachesample_xfilter2_doc_5.xml: Executed 100 tests in 430 msec
apachesample_xfilter2_doc_6.xml: Executed 100 tests in 440 msec
apachesample_xfilter2_doc_7.xml: Executed 100 tests in 500 msec
I did signature verification instead of document signing because there
is no
difference for HMAC. As you can see, I also have linear performance drop
as it is expected (more transform operations more time it takes).
Aleksey.
Christian Geuer-Pollmann wrote:
> --On Montag, 13. Mai 2002 14:43 -0700 Aleksey Sanin
> <aleksey@aleksey.com> wrote:
>
>> Will you the signed documents for apachesample_xfilter2_* tests, please?
>> I am interesting in doing XML Sec library performance testsing but I am
>> not sure I want to check out and install Java sources to create these
>> examples.
>
>
> Hi Aleksey,
>
> attached.
>
> Same as the last example: HMAC with the six octets from "secret" as
> 'passphrase'. doc is the 'signed' document, ref are the digested
> contents.
>
> Regards,
> Christian
Received on Tuesday, 14 May 2002 21:10:11 UTC