Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
The file would be even smaller if written with attributes, that is, in XML. Bob Foster david.lyon@c... wrote: > Hi Ron, > > Yes, it may appear a little strange at first. But there > is logic behind it all. > > What you have shown are two good examples of traditional > XML 1.0. No problems with those at all. Bog standard. > > The answer to the question is that when multiplied out > a few tens of thousands of times, every extra character > and every parsing ambiguouity can slow the process of digesting > the data down, dramatically. > > There isn't much difference between: > > <product_item> > <part_description>3 1/2" Spanner</part_description> > </product_item> > > and: > > <product_item> > part_description&="3 1/2^" Spanner" > </product_item> > > Counted, this gives 51 characters on the first part description > style, and 35 on the second according to my counting style (which > can make mistakes). > > Add in the two tags to be fair, this gives (51+29)=80 characters, and > (35+29)=64 characters per inventory item. > > But with 40,000 line items, an easily achievable inventory pricelist, > we get a saving of 760,000 bytes, or about 80% of the size of the > xml 1.0. > > But make it more realistic, add in some more fields: > > <product_item> > <part_description>3 1/2" Spanner</part_description> > <sell_price>18</sell_price> > <cost_price>15.50</cost_price> > <InStock>False</InStock> > <Arrival_Date>2005-02-15</Arrival_Date> > </product_item> > > and: > > <product_item> > part_description&="3 1/2^" Spanner" > sell_price$=18 > cost_price$=15.50 > InStock?=False > Arrival_Date@=2005-02-15 > </product_item> > > Style 1, 51+27+30+24+39+(29)=200 > Style 2, 35+14+17+14+24+(29)=133 > > Once again, multiply by 40,000 items and the respective > file sizes are approximately: > > Style 2 = 5320000 bytes > Style 1 = 8000000 bytes > > In XML 1.0, we have a larger file with no type information > and in the computergrid format, we have type information as > well as a saving of around 35% or 2,680,000 bytes. > > I guess they are the benefits of being strange as best as I > can explain it. I will stick to what I have got but thanks > for your comments anyway. > > Best Regards > > David
|
