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

Re: Use cases for parsing efficiency (was Re: Parsin

• To: robin.berjon@e...
• Subject: Re: Use cases for parsing efficiency (was Re: Parsing efficiency? - why not 'compile'????)
• From: "Alaric B. Snell" <alaric@a...>
• Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 16:52:10 +0000
• Cc: bill.dehora@p...,xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <3E5CEF69.8070505@e...>
• References: <OF047F14BF.0A3C2919-ONCA256CD8.00031C17@f...> <E18o4GW-0000Rj-00@c...> <3E5CEF69.8070505@e...>

On Wednesday 26 February 2003 16:46, Robin Berjon wrote:
> Alaric B. Snell wrote:
> > Binary data encodings that compare with XML seem to quote being able to
> > reduce the size of the data to 20%-50% of the original size. Happy? :-)
>
> Where do you get those numbers from? Results naturally vary a lot according
> to the data set, but given a sufficiently smart scheme compression of the
> structural information tends to revolve around 2% of the original size (x20
> factor) quite easily.

I was taking an admittedly quite conservative rough range of the numbers I've 
seen aired on this list - and including the actual CDATA, for some kinds of 
documents that have a lot of text in.

But for something that's mainly elements, numbers, and dates, the compression 
ratio can indeed be quite vast.

> With some SOAP messages it can get really stupid on some requests with
> factors over 200.

Way to go :-)

> And then the rest varies according to the data/structure ratio, whether
> zlib is an option or not, whether some things can be optimised away, etc.
> but 50% would seem highly unusual to me.

That's what you'd get for no gzipping (so CDATA is transferred as-is) with 
something that's 50% actual text rather than tags - verging perilously on 
actual document markup rather than data interchange.

ABS

-- 
A city is like a large, complex, rabbit
 - ARP

• References:
  • Parsing efficiency? - why not 'compile'????
    • From: Matthew.Bennett@f...
  • Re: Use cases for parsing efficiency (was Re: Parsing efficiency? - why not 'compile'????)
    • From: "Alaric B. Snell" <alaric@a...>
  • Re: Use cases for parsing efficiency (was Re: Parsing efficiency? - why not 'compile'????)
    • From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@e...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Use cases for parsing efficiency (was Re: Parsing efficiency? - why not 'compile'????)
• Next by Date: Re: The subsetting has begun
• Previous by thread: Re: Use cases for parsing efficiency (was Re: Parsing efficiency? - why not 'compile'????)
• Next by thread: Re: Use cases for parsing efficiency (was Re: Parsing efficiency? - why not 'compile'????)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread