Kirk, Pardon my ignorance, but when you say "serialization", what do you mean by that term? "Serialization" to me has always meant synchronizing multiple users of the same resource (the classic readers and writers problem), and I don't see how that applies to transforming SMF to XML (or JSON or any of the other alternatives you mentioned).
TIA for helping to cure my ignorance. Peter > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Kirk Wolf > Sent: Monday, April 20, 2009 3:47 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: insane thought - SMF reformatter? > > John, > > XML parsing is pretty slow, and for that reason many web technologies > are moving to other "serialization" techniques. > > Some better alternatives may include: JSON, "Blaze", Hessian, Google > Protocol Buffers, etc. > All have multiple language bindings, etc. For this purpose, you > want something that can have a "metamodel" or schema description, > which is really what SMF records lack.... yeah there are DSECTS, but > nothing semantic that can be used to piece them together for nested > records, etc. > > Best would be to build an Object model for SMF and then have > "pluggable" serialization of the data. This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your system. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
