Mailing-List: contact cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 07:09:41 -0400
From: "Williams, Murray Todd" <murray_williams@merck.com>
Subject: RE: SAX Event cacheing & Generators
To: "'cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org'" <cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org>
Cc: "'robert@webcybernetics.com'" <robert@webcybernetics.com>
Message-id: <1161B9F1E3E5D111A25700A02461F2AB02B37FB7@usrymx04.merck.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

Actually, I'm rather interested. I've been pondering for quite a while
whether there might be a "raw form" of XML storage that would be good to use
to "serialize and deserialize" XML data for rapid storage and access in a
database.  (Read: blob object storage.)

I'm not exactly sure how you handle the virtual .vs. static "callback
methods". Do you have any sample code snippets handy?

Murray Todd Williams

> ----------
> From: 	Rob Parker[SMTP:robert@webcybernetics.com]
> Reply To: 	cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
> Sent: 	Tuesday, May 02, 2000 6:48 AM
> To: 	cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
> Subject: 	SAX Event cacheing & Generators
> 
> I've been playing around with cacheing SAX Events. My motivation was to
> implement something similar to the FileGenerator - without the overhead
> of reading/parsing a file every request.
>  
> Option 1 - cacheing the file contents as a String and parsing the String
> at
> each request. (Uses memory but removes the file read overhead.)
>  
> Option 2 - parse the file once and build a list of 'pointers to callback
> functions' using
> the Method class, at each request, just run through the list and call the
> invoke method.
> (Uses less memory than option 1 and may be faster)
>  
> In my experience, If virtual callback methods are used, option 2 is
> slightly slower than option 1. If static
> callback methods are used, option 2 is much quicker than option 1.
>  
> If this is of value to any Cocoon developers, then let me know.
>  
> regards
>  
> Rob
>  
>