• To: Michael Kay <michael.h.kay@n...>
• Subject: RE: Partyin' like it's 1999
• From: Rich Salz <rsalz@d...>
• Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 07:34:36 -0400 (EDT)
• Cc: 'Elliotte Harold' <elharo@m...>, 'Dare Obasanjo' <dareo@m...>, 'Joshua Allen' <joshuaa@m...>, "xml-dev@l..." <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <20041028073647.UBUE13844.mta01-svc.ntlworld.com@Turtle>

I think some folks are missing the important implication of Dare's point.

Yes, right now, it is probably not a performance issue that a streaming
parser has to buffer everything until it sees the ">".  That can only be
addressed by anecdotal evidence. What is more important is that
*architecturally* this is a bottleneck. As things get faster, all the
other implementations (ew, a JVM? :) will fall away, and we'll still be
left with this architectural problem.  I betcha it's already an issue for
some folks building XML parsers in hardware.
	/r$

--
Rich Salz                  Chief Security Architect
DataPower Technology       http://www.datapower.com
XS40 XML Security Gateway  http://www.datapower.com/products/xs40.html
XML Security Overview      http://www.datapower.com/xmldev/xmlsecurity.html

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Partyin' like it's 1999
    • From: Elliotte Harold <elharo@m...>

• References:
  • RE: Partyin' like it's 1999
    • From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@n...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Partyin' like it's 1999
• Next by Date: Re: Partyin' like it's 1999
• Previous by thread: RE: Partyin' like it's 1999
• Next by thread: Re: Partyin' like it's 1999
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread