wehub-resource-sync
247153575d
Tests / tests (map[TOXENV:py310], macos-latest, 3.10) (push) Has been cancelled
Tests / tests (map[TOXENV:py311], macos-latest, 3.11) (push) Has been cancelled
Tests / tests (map[TOXENV:py312], macos-latest, 3.12) (push) Has been cancelled
Tests / tests (map[TOXENV:py313], macos-latest, 3.13) (push) Has been cancelled
29 lines
1.2 KiB
Markdown
29 lines
1.2 KiB
Markdown
# Performance Benchmarks
|
|
|
|
Scrapling isn't just powerful - it's also blazing fast. The following benchmarks compare Scrapling's parser with the latest versions of other popular libraries.
|
|
|
|
### Text Extraction Speed Test (5000 nested elements)
|
|
|
|
| # | Library | Time (ms) | vs Scrapling |
|
|
|---|:-----------------:|:---------:|:------------:|
|
|
| 1 | Scrapling | 1.98 | 1.0x |
|
|
| 2 | Parsel/Scrapy | 1.99 | 1.005 |
|
|
| 3 | Raw Lxml | 2.48 | 1.253 |
|
|
| 4 | PyQuery | 23.15 | ~12x |
|
|
| 5 | Selectolax | 196.09 | ~99x |
|
|
| 6 | MechanicalSoup | 1531.24 | ~773.4x |
|
|
| 7 | BS4 with Lxml | 1535.19 | ~775.3x |
|
|
| 8 | BS4 with html5lib | 3388.16 | ~1711.2x |
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Element Similarity & Text Search Performance
|
|
|
|
Scrapling's adaptive element finding capabilities significantly outperform alternatives:
|
|
|
|
| Library | Time (ms) | vs Scrapling |
|
|
|-------------|:---------:|:------------:|
|
|
| Scrapling | 2.29 | 1.0x |
|
|
| AutoScraper | 12.46 | 5.441x |
|
|
|
|
> All benchmarks represent averages of 100+ runs. See [benchmarks.py](https://github.com/D4Vinci/Scrapling/blob/main/benchmarks.py) for methodology.
|