XOM API for Processing XML with Java

[Nils_Kilden-Pedersen AT Countrywide.Com]

xom-interest-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org wrote on 02/19/2004 01:55:36 PM:

> I agree, but it this case the receiver is part of the
> same application. We are processing a couple million
> docs a day and they all go through sort of pipeline or
> assembly line if you wish. At each step (some step are
> synchronous and some are asynchronous) specific pieces
> of information in the doc are required. Some of these
> steps for a given document can all happen in a matter
> of milliseconds while some steps might involved hours
> (Documents sometimes arrive in sections from different
> external parties). All steps are synchronized using
> message passing, for those steps close in time, not
> having to parse the document again provides a
> significant boost in performance. For those steps which
> are separated in time by any significant amount of
> time, say 15 min. we reparse the document. So, as you
> can see it is not as clear cut as just saying passing a
> DOM object or XOM object around is bad distributed
> design. I some places we only pass a identifier that
> allows a process to get its document from a distributed
> cache, so even if communications don't involve passing
> around serializable objects, they still need to be
> serializable to be placed in a distributed cache.

Why not go with an object model instead? Maybe even use JAXB or something 
similar that can convert your schema/DTD to java classes. You would gain 
better type safety and much nicer code.

Nils
>From Brendan.Johnston AT wellsfargo.com  Thu Feb 19 17:20:00 2004
Return-Path: <Brendan.Johnston AT wellsfargo.com>
Delivered-To: xom-interest AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from gideons.wellsfargo.com (gideons.wellsfargo.com [171.72.5.146])
        by happyhouse.metalab.unc.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2EF120016
        for <xom-interest AT lists.ibiblio.org>;
        Thu, 19 Feb 2004 17:19:59 -0500 (EST)
Received: from urals.wellsfargo.com (urals.wellsfargo.com [10.30.2.152])
        by gideons.wellsfargo.com (8.12.9-20030924/8.12.4) with ESMTP id
        i1JMJxNZ020577 for <xom-interest AT lists.ibiblio.org>;
        Thu, 19 Feb 2004 16:19:59 -0600 (CST)
Received: from urals.wellsfargo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
        by urals.wellsfargo.com (Switch-3.0.5/Switch-3.0.0) with ESMTP id
        i1JMJBwo008705 for <xom-interest AT lists.ibiblio.org>;
        Thu, 19 Feb 2004 16:19:11 -0600 (CST)
Received: from msgiw55cacah01.wellsfargo.com (msgiw55cacah01.wellsfargo.com
        [10.12.114.246])
        by urals.wellsfargo.com (Switch-3.0.5/Switch-3.0.0) with ESMTP id
        i1JMJAwo008689 for <xom-interest AT lists.ibiblio.org>;
        Thu, 19 Feb 2004 16:19:10 -0600 (CST)
Received: by msgiw55cacah01.wellsfargo.com with Internet Mail Service
        (5.5.2653.19) id <1J5LMJ0W>; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 14:19:56 -0800
Message-ID: 
<5774C16D71233A4A9153101675CE20DB01F97B7E AT msgsw55cacah27.wellsfargo.com>
From: Brendan.Johnston AT wellsfargo.com
To: xom-interest AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: RE: re: [XOM-interest] Serializing objects that contain an instan
        ce of nu.xom.Document, part II
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 14:19:55 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
X-BeenThere: xom-interest AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4
Precedence: list
List-Id: xom-interest.lists.ibiblio.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/xom-interest>,
        <mailto:xom-interest-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/xom-interest>
List-Post: <mailto:xom-interest AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/xom-interest>,
        <mailto:xom-interest-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 22:20:00 -0000

It seems to me that some people are saying:

   XML serialization has certain advantages over Java serialization.

And others are saying:

   Java serialization is faster than XML serialization
   in a way that is significant for my app.

My question is:

   What is the performance difference between Java serialization and XML
serialization?

If those who have said that Java serialization is faster have good numbers
for their app,
then can they share them?

Brendan