How to circumvent SOAP request/response delays?

How to circumvent SOAP request/response delays?

Please advise how to circumvent SOAP request/response delays. Current download testing would appear to rate ODBC at +/- 10 times faster than SOAP. What developments if any, are on the horizon to rectify this imbalance?

    Requires Free Membership to View

    When you register, you'll begin receiving targeted emails from my team of award-winning writers. Our goal is to keep you informed on recent service-oriented architecture (SOA) and SOA-related topics such as integration, governance, Web services, Cloud and more.

    Hannah Smalltree, Editorial Director

    By submitting your registration information to SearchSOA.com you agree to receive email communications from TechTarget and TechTarget partners. We encourage you to read our Privacy Policy which contains important disclosures about how we collect and use your registration and other information. If you reside outside of the United States, by submitting this registration information you consent to having your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States. Your use of SearchSOA.com is governed by our Terms of Use. You may contact us at webmaster@TechTarget.com.

The performance of SOAP requests varies depending on the SOAP implementation you use. The factor that has the most impact on SOAP performance is XML parsing. There are three common ways to parse XML: DOM, SAX, and pull parsing. DOM is extremely resource-intensive and performance gets significantly worse as the size of the message gets larger. SAX is quite a bit faster than DOM. Pull parsing is the fastest, assuming that you have a priori knowledge of the schema of the message (i.e., a WSDL description). The other key factor that can affect SOAP performance is resource management. I can't speak for the other SOAP implementors, but at Systinet we've focused a lot of attention on performance, and the next release of WASP for Java (beta release scheduled to go out later this month) now runs faster than RMI, which makes it pretty comparable to ODBC performance.

This was first published in May 2002