Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
I think you are absolutely correct, the tag to text ratio definitely has an impact. I wrote a very simplistic dom implementation (in C, loaded by expat) and tested it with a machine generated file with a lot of empty tags. This had a big footprint relative to a file that is mostly text. Haven't tried that in Java, but it might be fun. Mark Liam Quin wrote: >On Tue, Apr 06, 2004 at 08:01:42AM -0400, Mark Schmeets wrote: > > >>I have not tried xmlbuddy, but all of the xml editors I have tried, >>including oXygen ( and the Win32 ones XMLSpy, XMLNotepad, etc. ) exhibit >>this behavior. Using RAM at 10 to 12 times the size of the document on >>disk. I have always assumed it was because the were using DOM's >>internally, and that the >>DOM implementations were memory hogs. Any one have any wisdom to share here? >> >> > >Have you tested how the density of tags to text affects this? > >I remember that with SoftQuad Author/Editor (in SGML days), the >overhead per element was significant, but text averaged not so >much more than disk overhead. Systems using 16-bit characters >internally to represent Unicode text will do slightly worse than >using twice as much memory as disk space for text that's mostly >US ASCII. > >For Java-based software, the JVM you use may also make a difference, >although my experience (mostly on Linux) has been that the non-Sun JVMs >don't actually run much software I want to run. > >Liam > > >
|
