Can you please provide a snippet of your DOM tree traversing code. It is hard to see what the problem is if we do not know what you are doing.
Regards Erik > -----Original Message----- > From: Nath [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: den 25 maj 2004 19:07 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Repost: Xerces XML performance problems > > I had a mix-up in mailing lists, so I'm reposting my question here (with > some amendments to make it clearer) for any assistance. > > > > > I converted over a dictionary of words and definitions into XML files (one > file per letter of the alphabet), each weighing around 1-5 megs (I chose > XML > for storage and extensibility reasons). I'm trying to access node > information from these files and it's taking an incredible amount of time > to > do it. When acquiring node information from small files (letters X, Y, and > Z - a total of 815 words or 151 KB) the DOM document returns results > somewhat quickly and I can process the entire tree in less than 2 seconds. > When parsing the letter A file (11,000 some words or 1.58 megs), it takes > 5 > seconds just to process 20 word nodes (see below for a typical word node). > It seems the larger the XML file (ie: the more nodes within), the longer > it > takes to process all the nodes. Granted there's obviously going to be more > time involved, but between the 2 files I've tested, there doesn't seem to > be > a linear process-time relationship. Can anyone suggest why this is > happening > and how I can fix it? I've used xerces c++ 2.4.0 and recently upgraded to > xerces c++ 2.5.0. > > > I'm just following the standard XML start-up and DOM parsing procedure > - Initialize platform utils > - Don't validate files > - parse and assign DOM document (fast) > - go through each child node and collect data (slow) > > > > The dictionary format is simply: > > <dictionary> > > <word> > > <name>whatever</name> > > <def> 1 </def> > > <def> 2 </def> > > > > </word> > > > > </dictionary> > > I have a 1600MHz processor, so handling a few meg files should be fairly > quick. I've also tried parsing the file with SAX, albeit the performance > is > a tad better, the end result is still a lengthy wait. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
