XML can be a problem when it is really lengthy (lots of results, large
results) such that a binary format could be useful in certain cases
where we control both ends of the pipe (i.e. SolrJ.) I've seen apps
that deal with really large files wrapped in XML where the XML parsing
takes a significant amount of time as compared to a more compact
binary format.
I think it at least warrants profiling/testing.
-Grant
On Feb 21, 2008, at 12:07 PM, Noble Paul നോബിള്
नोब्ळ् wrote:
hi,
The format over the wire is not of great significance because it gets
unmarshalled into the corresponding language object as soon as it
comes out
of the wire. I would say XML/JSON should meet 99% of the requirements
because all the platforms come with an unmarshaller for both of these.
But,If it can offer good performance improvement it is worth trying.
--Noble
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 3:41 AM, alexander lind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On Feb 20, 2008, at 9:31 AM, Doug Steigerwald wrote:
A few months back I wrote a YAML update request handler to see if we
could post documents faster than with XMl. We did see some small
speed improvements (didn't write down the numbers), but the hacked
together code was probably making it slower as well. Not sure if
there are faster YAML libraries out there either.
We're not actually using it, since it was just a small proof of
concept type of project, but is this anything people might be
interested in?
Out of simple preference I would love to see a YAML request handler
just because I like the YAML format. If its also faster than XML,
then
all the better.
Cheers
Alec
--
--Noble Paul
--------------------------
Grant Ingersoll
http://www.lucenebootcamp.com
Next Training: April 7, 2008 at ApacheCon Europe in Amsterdam
Lucene Helpful Hints:
http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/BasicsOfPerformance
http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/LuceneFAQ
