xpath-performance.adoc

XPath Performance Benchmarks

Table of Contents

• Overview
• Test Environment
• Performance Summary
• axes
• simple_paths
• position_predicates
• boolean_predicates
• multiple_predicates
• nodeset_functions
• string_functions
• boolean_functions
• number_functions
• complex_queries
• Conclusion

Overview

This document provides comprehensive performance benchmarks, generated from actual benchmark runs using benchmark-ips.

IMPORTANT: This file is auto-generated from benchmark data. Do not edit manually. To update, run the appropriate rake task (see footer).

Test Environment

• Ruby Version: 3.1.1

• Platform: arm64-darwin21

• Taurus Version: 0.1.0

• Libraries Available:

• Nokogiri: Available

• Timestamp: 2025-11-27T18:27:43+0800

• Method: benchmark-ips

Performance Summary

Overall Results (50 tests, vs Nokogiri):

• Average: 2.34× slower

• Best case: 3.13× faster

• Worst case: 10.38× slower

• Tests faster: 2/50 (4.0%)

• Tests slower: 48/50 (96.0%)

Verdict: ❌ Needs Optimization - Significantly slower than Nokogiri

axes

Test	Taurus	Nokogiri	vs Nokogiri
Child	1.39µs	4.3µs	3.09× faster ✅
Descendant	59.56µs	5.74µs	10.38× slower ❌
Descendant Or Self	17.69µs	6.49µs	2.73× slower ❌
Parent	11.5µs	4.27µs	2.69× slower ❌
Ancestor	12.5µs	4.3µs	2.91× slower ❌
Ancestor Or Self	12.72µs	4.36µs	2.92× slower ❌
Self	11.5µs	7.53µs	1.53× slower ❌
Following Sibling	11.83µs	6.89µs	1.72× slower ❌
Preceding Sibling	11.37µs	5.52µs	2.06× slower ❌
Following	17.99µs	12.94µs	1.39× slower ❌
Preceding	12.91µs	5.3µs	2.44× slower ❌
Attribute	11.29µs	5.08µs	2.22× slower ❌
Namespace	14.79µs	7.71µs	1.92× slower ❌

simple_paths

Test	Taurus	Nokogiri	vs Nokogiri
Absolute Path	6.01µs	4.99µs	1.2× slower ❌
Relative Path	1.65µs	4.66µs	2.82× faster ✅
Descendant Path	12.73µs	4.48µs	2.84× slower ❌
Wildcard	10.55µs	4.51µs	2.34× slower ❌
Attribute Access	25.37µs	4.76µs	5.33× slower ❌
Text Nodes	12.85µs	4.67µs	2.75× slower ❌

position_predicates

Test	Taurus	Nokogiri	vs Nokogiri
First	38.24µs	5.95µs	6.43× slower ❌
Last	14.06µs	5.86µs	2.4× slower ❌
Position Eq	11.34µs	5.6µs	2.03× slower ❌
Position Range	11.83µs	5.56µs	2.13× slower ❌

boolean_predicates

Test	Taurus	Nokogiri	vs Nokogiri
Attribute Exists	11.91µs	5.77µs	2.06× slower ❌
Attribute Value	12.15µs	7.24µs	1.68× slower ❌
Element Exists	13.13µs	7.57µs	1.73× slower ❌
Negation	11.87µs	6.21µs	1.91× slower ❌

multiple_predicates

Test	Taurus	Nokogiri	vs Nokogiri
Two Predicates	16.65µs	6.86µs	2.43× slower ❌
Position And Boolean	11.52µs	11.17µs	1.03× slower ❌
Three Predicates	16.73µs	11.11µs	1.51× slower ❌

nodeset_functions

Test	Taurus	Nokogiri	vs Nokogiri
Count	10.64µs	3.69µs	2.88× slower ❌
Last Func	17.68µs	5.06µs	3.49× slower ❌
Position Func	12.61µs	8.05µs	1.57× slower ❌
Local Name	19.11µs	13.09µs	1.46× slower ❌
Name	15.31µs	13.7µs	1.12× slower ❌

string_functions

Test	Taurus	Nokogiri	vs Nokogiri
String	13.64µs	11.58µs	1.18× slower ❌
Concat	43.93µs	12.81µs	3.43× slower ❌
Starts With	20.35µs	7.64µs	2.66× slower ❌
Contains	14.53µs	9.3µs	1.56× slower ❌
String Length	15.21µs	8.94µs	1.7× slower ❌

boolean_functions

Test	Taurus	Nokogiri	vs Nokogiri
Boolean	10.76µs	4.56µs	2.36× slower ❌
Not	12.34µs	6.8µs	1.81× slower ❌
True	11.11µs	5.15µs	2.16× slower ❌

number_functions

Test	Taurus	Nokogiri	vs Nokogiri
Number	12.6µs	7.06µs	1.78× slower ❌
Sum	14.71µs	4.51µs	3.26× slower ❌
Floor	18.48µs	11.28µs	1.64× slower ❌
Ceiling	22.09µs	10.11µs	2.18× slower ❌

complex_queries

Test	Taurus	Nokogiri	vs Nokogiri
Multi Axis	12.58µs	6.44µs	1.95× slower ❌
Union	24.42µs	13.61µs	1.79× slower ❌
Nested	18.96µs	12.73µs	1.49× slower ❌

Conclusion

Based on 50 comprehensive tests (vs Nokogiri):

• Average Performance: 2.34× slower

• Tests faster: 2/50 (4.0%)

• Tests slower: 48/50 (96.0%)

• Best result: 0.32×

• Worst result: 10.38×

❌ Taurus performance needs optimization - Significantly slower than Nokogiri (2.34× average).

---

Generated: 2025-11-27T18:27:43+0800 Baseline: Nokogiri