Thanks Florian. Problem is the performance actually degrades quite a bit when
there are a lot of objects in memory. Instantiating a lot of objects is dog
slow as well. Also, there would really be no dependency with the datasource
even if we go XML (assuming this is the best option) because either way we have
to write code to process/transform the incoming data, in this case it would be
just code that transforms whatever format it comes in as into XML. There is
also no need for events in this case as well since they are plain vanilla data
objects with only public properties in it.
- boon
--- On Sun, 8/3/08, florian.salihovic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From: florian.salihovic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [flexcoders] Re: Large XML /w E4X vs. serialized objects /w tree
traversal
To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, August 3, 2008, 12:53 AM
I would choose the class hierachy approach. Write your own classes
for relationships,
people etc.
The pros of this approach:
* You do not depend on a datasource: it does not matter where the data comes
from
((different) XML sources, remoting [,...]).
* You have strong typed objects and you can embed your own events and errors.
This
means (unit-) testing becomes more effective.
The cons:
* You have to implement a parser.
Best regards from Germany.
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com, Boon Chew <[EMAIL PROTECTED] .> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am building an app that deals with a fair bit of people relationship data
> coming down
as XML, so the hierarchical nature of XML actually comes in handy here. I have
a few
options: one is to serialize each person XML node into an object, and setup the
appropriate data structure for hierarchical data traversal (e.g. rooted tree).
Another option
is to keep everything in memory as XML and accessed the node data via E4X. The
third
option is to take a hybrid approach, won't consider this route right now unless
this
appears to be the best.
>
> My concern is that instantiating thousands of objects will create a
> performance issue
(happened at another project that dealt with thousands of dto's), not to
mention it's very
slow to instantiate lots of objects. At the same time, I am not sure how fast
E4X is at
dealing with large XML.
>
> Which approach would you take? Which one is likely to scale better? Large
> in-memory
XML + E4X traversal or data structure with lots of objects + algorthmic tree
traversal?
>
> - boon
>
