James Ward has a RIA benchmark app which is probably at least a little
self-serving since he IS an Adobe Flex Evangelist but...still could
shed some light on different transfer format speeds.

http://www.jamesward.org/census/

- Todd

--- In [email protected], "Abyss Knight" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 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" <chunter@> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 12:11 PM, Brendan Meutzner <bmeutzner@>
> 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
> >
>


Reply via email to