Lists Home |
Date Index |
Alaric B. Snell writes:
> If your system spends lots of its time waiting for networking, do
> you disagree that reducing the bandwidth utilisation would reduce
> the service round trip time and increase the maximum throughput?
On the other hand, text compresses very well during network transfer,
and XML, particularly so. That's why we need to run some real-world
tests rather than speculating -- far too many of the mob of existing
XML-related specs have been produced on speculation and wishful
thinking rather than based on experience and proven need.
I have no objection to coming up with better ways of moving
information around, with or without XML, but first I need (a)
credible, repeatable field tests that prove that there's a significant
problem, and then (b) credible, repeatable field tests that prove that
a different format can actually solve those problems. With those
results in hand, then we can talk about the costs and benefits (and
whether the XML activity is the right place to try to solve the
> So to go back to emperical test results...
> The ASN.1/XML interop people found that, for data-oriented XML,
> savings of 80% are common; eg, messages being one fifth the
> size. Per-packet overheads aside, that would imply that you can fit
> about five times as many ASN.1/PER encoded messages down a given
> network connection in a second as you can XML messages.
Thanks. I'd be interested in seeing a detailed report -- do you have
All the best,
David Megginson, firstname.lastname@example.org, http://www.megginson.com/