From: Peter Jacobi (pj@walter-graphtek.com)
Date: Thu Jan 04 2001 - 11:16:03 EST
Hi Timothee, Daniel, All,
I was thinking of along same lines as Timothee, when writing my earlier
post today. But I now hope to understand Daniel's point of not including
this into libxml:
While processing, especially updating, your mixed XML/binary data you
hold them in an application dependant form, matching your processing
requirements. For example multiple files in a subdirectory or multiple
forks of a file if supported by your filesystem.
When freezing or transmitting the data, you convert to the ZIP file format,
Daniel adopted to support.
Regards,
Peter
>
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 09:41:04AM -0600, Timothee Besset wrote:
> >
> > How well does the zip approach allow file modification? Let's say I end
> > up with a zip file that's 300Mb, in which I randomly add and remove
> > chunks (of the size of an average file, say 100kb)? I understand this
> > zip format would be fine for reading, but I'm a bit worried about
> > writing performances :-)
>
> Well I don't care too much about writing performances, it's a packaging
> format not a filesystem. Similary XML is a good interchange format but I
> would not make it the internal memory representation of my programs data.
>
> Daniel
>
---- Message from the list xml@rpmfind.net Archived at : http://xmlsoft.org/messages/ to unsubscribe: echo "unsubscribe xml" | mail majordomo@rpmfind.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jan 04 2001 - 12:43:30 EST