I see, thanks for the info.

Yours sincerely,
Andrey.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Slide Users Mailing List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 9:29 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Using the slide api directly vs. using the webdav client
> 
> I haven't measured the performance difference, but I have put 
> timer logs and the http overhead is less than 100 ms while 
> slide api calls take anywhere from 0.5 seconds to almost a 
> minute (large collections, report method and other nasty 
> stuff) based on the request. Please don't hear me say that 
> http is zero overhead. The overhead is negligible compared to 
> the overal execution time.
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Andrey Shulinsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'Slide Users Mailing List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 7:12 PM
> Subject: RE: Using the slide api directly vs. using the webdav client
> 
> 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Slide Users Mailing List 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 6:50 PM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: Re: Using the slide api directly vs. using the 
> webdav client
> > >
> > > I don't think performance is going to be the issue here. If
> > > your client and server are on the same machine, the overhead
> > > of http will be minimal. The big advantage that outweighs
> >
> > Actually, I've heard two quite opposite opinions. I wonder 
> if somebody
> has
> > actually measured this difference somehow... :-)


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to