half-baked parsers vs binary XML

[Gabe Beged-Dov]

Matthew Sergeant (EML) wrote:

> If I could just call parsefile() without any extra work I think it would be
fast > enough.

As Nathan Kurz's posting to the perl-xml shows, there is a bottleneck in just
the parsing of the XML without bringing callback firing, let alone query
processing into the picture.

> What I'm really doing, by using Storable is caching the parse+query phase.

This is great if your use-case supports it. It is not a general purpose
approach to providing scaleable performance for soft real time systems that
want to incorporate XML parsing.

> That should really be considered standard practice for any high
> performance system.

Once again, I would say that if your "high performance" system can architected
using a "cache the parse+query" approach and the complexity and storage
overheads are acceptable, go for it.  There are alot of "high performance"
systems that wont be amenable to this approach.

Gabe Beged-Dov
www.jfinity.com




>
>
>         Matt.


xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)