Advertisement

Comparing SOAP Performance for Various Encodings, Protocols, and Connections

  • Jaakko Kangasharju
  • Sasu Tarkoma
  • Kimmo Raatikainen
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2775)

Abstract

SOAP is rapidly gaining popularity as the Web service protocol. At the same time, small mobile devices with wireless access, in particular to the Internet, are becoming more prevalent. At first look, it would seem that SOAP as a protocol consumes quite a lot of network bandwidth and processor time. Therefore its suitability for small devices and wireless links needs to be evaluated. This paper presents two optimizations that can be applied to typical uses of SOAP, message compression and persistent connections, and measures their performance in some common situations. Asynchronous messaging with SOAP is also treated briefly. The measurements indicate that a suitable compression scheme can save bandwidth substantially, and that the protocols underlying the typical use of SOAP can be improved considerably in the presence of unreliable high-latency networks.

Keywords

Measurement Of Wireless And Mobile Systems Mobile And Wireless Applications Web Services Over Mobile And Wireless Networks 

References

  1. 1.
    Amir, E., Balakrishnan, H., Seshan, S., Katz, R.: Efficient TCP over networks with wireless links. In: Proceedings of the 5th IEEE Workshop of Hot Topics in Operating Systems (May 1995)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Avaro, O., Salembier, P.: MPEG-7 Systems: Overview. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology 11(6), 760–764 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Balakrishnan, H., Padmanabhan, V., Seshan, S., Katz, R.: A comparison of mechanisms for improving TCP performance over wireless links. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking 5(6), 756–769 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., Nielsen, H.F.: RFC 1945: Hypertext Transfer Protocol – HTTP/1.0 (May 1996), http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1945.txt
  5. 5.
    Feldspar, A.: An Explanation of the DEFLATE Algorithm (August 1997), http://www.gzip.org/deflate.html
  6. 6.
    Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Nielsen, H.F., Masinter, L., Leach, P., Berners-Lee, T.: RFC 2616: Hypertext Transfer Protocol – HTTP/1.1 (June 1999), http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2616.txt
  7. 7.
    Girardot, M., Millau, N.S.: an encoding format for efficient representation and exchange of XML over the Web. In: 9th International World Wide Web Conference (May 2000), http://www9.org/w9cdrom/154/154.html
  8. 8.
    Liefke, H., Suciu, D.: XMill: an efficient compressor for XML data. In: Proceedings of the 2000 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data (May 2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). W3C Note: Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP) 1.1 (May 2000), http://www.w3.org/TR/SOAP/
  10. 10.
    World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). W3C Proposed Recommendation: SOAP Version 1.2 Part 1: Messaging Framework and SOAP Version 1.2 Part 2: Adjuncts (May 2003) and, http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/PR-soap12-part1-20030507/, http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/PR-soap12-part1-20030507/
  11. 11.
    World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). W3C Note: WAP Binary XML Content Format (June 1999), http://www.w3.org/TR/wbxml/

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jaakko Kangasharju
    • 1
  • Sasu Tarkoma
    • 1
  • Kimmo Raatikainen
    • 1
  1. 1.Helsinki Institute for Information TechnologyFinland

Personalised recommendations