On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 02:35:02PM +0100, Martin Nilsson (�skblod) @ Pike (-) developers forum wrote:
My figures are from the language shootout. One year old though.
Here is the results of my benchmark against real data set with relatively complex (and real-life) patterns (Pike v7.4.10):
=== SNIP === aldem@fort:~/pike/Squid$ time pike -DUSE_PCRE -M.. re-bench.pike 98.86% (eta 0m00s) 1293134/ 16100 Total of 1307519 lines, 16403 rejects
real 1m26.133s user 1m23.430s sys 0m2.330s
aldem@fort:~/pike/Squid$ time pike -M.. re-bench.pike 99.82% (eta 0m00s) 1305263/ 16335 Total of 1307519 lines, 16403 rejects
real 2m43.648s user 2m38.840s sys 0m3.040s === SNIP ===
As you could see, the PCRE is almost two times faster. I run this over my Squid log file, so data are pretty real, and volume is also good enough for testing.
The source: http://aldem.net/pike/re-bench.pike - actually this is stripped out from my squid log analyzer and simplified - only REs are benchmarked.
I used my own PCRE module which I wrote long time ago, in case if someone is interested I'll publish it (though, it has no autoconf support and a bit "raw" - I didn't touch it for long time already).
Regards, /Al