| To: | "Kumar" <kumarkakani@xxxxxxxxx>, <users@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | RE: [cinjug-users] Max file size for DOM parser |
| From: | "Baxter, Frank \(LNG-CON\)" <frank.baxter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 15 Feb 2007 10:03:02 -0500 |
| Delivered-to: | mailing list users@cinjug.org |
| Mailing-list: | contact users-help@cinjug.org; run by ezmlm |
| Thread-index: | AcdQb8m7wMNFkxqlRgm7JNSfc49NDQAogYtg |
| Thread-topic: | [cinjug-users] Max file size for DOM parser |
|
I've had a good experience with StaX, in particular the
Woodstox implementation (http://woodstox.codehaus.org/).
No other implementations came close in terms of speed and stability. I've
parsed files up to 1GB in length using the API, which I find to be much easier
to use than SAX.
Frank From: Kumar [mailto:kumarkakani@xxxxxxxxx] Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 2:35 PM To: users@xxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [cinjug-users] Max file size for DOM parser I guess at some point down the lane, we might have to extend this application as a web service (on z/OS with a lot more memory), in which case I would have to consider SAX or StAX etc, which don't hold an in-memory representation of the XML data. Kumar On 2/14/07, Hudson, Loren
(GE Infra, Aviation, Non-GE, US) <loren.hudson@xxxxxx> wrote:
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | :SPAM: Surely Slim Program, Marylou Garcia |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | :SPAM: Harder and Pleasurable, Dena Hammer |
| Previous by Thread: | :SPAM: Surely Slim Program, Marylou Garcia |
| Next by Thread: | :SPAM: Harder and Pleasurable, Dena Hammer |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |