Hi Manuel, thanks for your e-mail.
> - is this the most performant approach, or would it make sense to e.g. > build one stream on the fly and somehow turn it into an inputstream to > be sent via add? I'd say that your approach is close to an optimal solution, as the ADD command is pretty cheap, compared to e.g. REPLACE. If you believe that you could still run into some bottlenecks, you could have a look at, or provide us, with the output of Java's profiler (e.g. -Xrunhprof:cpu=samples), > - is there a performance cost in adding with an ID? We don't really > need them since we retrieve records via a query - and those resources > aren't really files on the file-system Currently, there will be no additional costs, as we don't perform any checks if a document with the same name/path has already been stored. > - is there a performance penalty in doing this kind of parsing concurrently? Concurrent operations will be managed by the central transaction manager. At the time of writing this, all write operations are performed one after another, but in near future, concurrent write operations to different databases will also be run in parallel. > - are there any JVM parameters that would help speed this up? I In general, Java will be faster when run with -server, but this option may have been chosen anyway by your Java runtime. Regarding the maximum amount of memory, there shouldn't be any noteworthy differences when adding documents. Hope this helps, Christian _______________________________________________ BaseX-Talk mailing list BaseX-Talk@mailman.uni-konstanz.de https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk
