xml-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Scott Boag/CAM/Lotus" <Scott_Boag/CAM/Lo...@lotus.com>
Subject Re: Auto-buffering in BaseSerializer
Date Sat, 27 Nov 1999 18:23:38 GMT

> I had a bad experience with this in the past. Someone did a performance
> test on OpenXML without buffering the input, the parser went
> exponentially slow as the file size increased. Ever since I always
> buffer.

That's the caller's problem.  Don't try and fix this for them.

> But it's still way faster than having no buffering ;-)

Xalan can't afford to do double or triple buffering.

-1 on Auto-buffering.

-scott




                                                                                         
                         
                    Assaf Arkin                                                          
                         
                    <arkin@exoffi        To:     Scott Boag/CAM/Lotus <Scott_Boag/CAM/Lotus@lotus.com>
            
                    ce.com>              cc:     general@xml.apache.org               
                            
                                         Subject:     Re: Auto-buffering in BaseSerializer
                        
                    11/27/99                                                             
                         
                    12:54 AM                                                             
                         
                                                                                         
                         
                                                                                         
                         




I had a bad experience with this in the past. Someone did a performance
test on OpenXML without buffering the input, the parser went
exponentially slow as the file size increased. Ever since I always
buffer.

And yes, my applications tend to do double and triple buffering because
I can never expect a buffer to be done on either side of a library call.
But it's still way faster than having no buffering ;-)

arkin


Scott Boag/CAM/Lotus wrote:
>
> In BaseSerializer.jave:
> >    _writer = new BufferedWriter( writer );
>
> I don't think it's a good idea to automatically buffer the writer, since
> this can cause double-buffering performance issues.  Also, the caller may
> not want the writer buffered.
>
> -scott





Mime
View raw message