>From my understanding is that AMF, because it is binary encoded, is the fastest mode of transfer available. I've seen a couple links around the web profiling AMF vs. JSON vs. XML and from what I've worked on personally, the JSONDecoder is very slow, XML tends to have a large transfer size, and AMF seems speedy.
HTH, -- William --- In [email protected], "Chris Hunter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 12:11 PM, Brendan Meutzner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > The best workaround I've found is creating different aggregations of the > > data being shown. A fair bit of functionality is involved in defining and > > switching up the datasets, and would really only make sense for date based > > datapoints. Concept would involve creating less granular datapoints > > (weekly, vs daily) and show the weekly data when larger ranges are being > > displayed. Shorten the range, and switch up to show daily data, and so > > on... check out Google Finance for good examples on this. > > This is the approach we've taken on a set of graphs that can display > everything from a few > hours worth of data at 30 second intervals to a few years with a > granularity of a week. > > Many of the documented recommendations for speeding up charts (e.g. > removing the drop shadow) > were very helpful as well. > > At this point, a lot of our lag seems to come from the process of > incrementally fetching data > as the user pans/zooms the chart. I'm curious if anybody has profiled > returning chart data as XML > vs JSON vs the binary formats and whether one of those approaches has > a benefit in terms of > rendering speed (or just transfer speed on the wire). > > Chris Hunter >
