Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: XML-enabled databases, XQuery APIs
 On 4/15/05, Liam Quin <liam@w...> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 01:03:13PM -0500, Peter Hunsberger wrote: > > On 4/15/05, Michael Kay <mike@s...> wrote: > [...] > >> It's not difficult to do it. It's just difficult to do it in such a way that > >> you can reassemble a shredded document of any size before the kettle has > >> boiled. > > [..] > > > > > Don't know what you mean by "any size", but in our current case we > > have one screen that has about 9 documents some of which are several K > > in size. > > I used a "shredding" system (I didn't design or build it) working on > aircraft manuals once. A "tiny" document was about 5 megabytes of > text (i.e. not including graphics) and took 45 minutes to copy on a > high-end SPARC server. Documents with 150,000 pages were not unheard > of in that industry, although 10,000 was more common. You get similar > complexity in other industries, and it's why they turned early on to > using SGML as part of their document management strategy. "Just go > through 150,000 pages and change every part 2003 to part 1826, but > be careful not to affect dates" etc etc, the story we all know. > > If your documents are only "several K" [Kbytes?] in size you have > a lot more flexibility. Sure, and that seems to be the main point of this perma-thread: you've got to match the tools to the job at hand. No surprise there. (And yes K == Kbytes). My main reason for jumping in is to emphasize that we've had good experiences with XML to RDB mapping and I don't think it should be counted out by way of assumptions about performance or functionality. -- Peter Hunsberger 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
