[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: "Binary XML" proposals

• From: Sean McGrath <sean.mcgrath@p...>
• To: Al Snell <alaric@a...>,Christian Nentwich <c.nentwich@c...>
• Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 11:49:00 +0100

At 10:59 10/04/2001 +0100, Al Snell wrote:

>1) Not all tasks are scaleable, meaning you can't just throw more
>computers at it to make it faster. A long pipeline of processes
>communication with XML will have a latency that can only be combatted by
>climbing an exponential curve of faster hardware - or fixing the software.

You really need to back up an assertion of an exponential
execution profile with hard data!

You will find no shortage of takers on this list to review your
performance data and contribute to a debate on speed
but you must provide the data first.

I am old enough to know from bitter experience that the places
where programmers perceive the bottleknecks to be are rarely
where the really are.


4) If the tools a programmer is given is slow, then it can mean MORE work
>for the programmer when his application turns out to have unacceptable
>real-time performance (seen more with interactive desktop applications
>than Web apps, but don't forget that the desktop app market exists and is
>FAR FROM SMALL!), and

>profiling reveals it's spending all it's time inside an XML parser.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Ah, so you have profiling data! Great. Can we see it?

regards,
Sean

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: "Binary XML" proposals
    • From: "Al B. Snell" <alaric@a...>

• References:
  • Re: "Binary XML" proposals
    • From: Christian Nentwich <c.nentwich@c...>

• Prev by Date: Re: "Binary XML" proposals
• Next by Date: Re: "Binary XML" proposals
• Previous by thread: Re: "Binary XML" proposals
• Next by thread: Re: "Binary XML" proposals
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread