Keith Visco wrote:
Hi Dennis,
Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
Sorry, I knew you'd added some basic structure change support recently,
Actually "container object" support has been around for many versions
now...for at least a year and half or more. Container objects are
objects whic
Dean Hiller wrote:
here is one of the messages. I do now have VP approval to give code.
I just need to dig it up sometime. I have not gotten around to
narrowing what caused the hit down. I just have a fix. When I work
on it again, I will send you the code. I don't have the time to dig
i
oice is up to you. Great thing about open source is
if you don't like their performance, change their code and submit back
to help their performance.
Dean
Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
Part 2 of my article comparing XML data binding frameworks for Java
is now online at
http://www-106.ibm.com/d
Part 2 of my article comparing XML data binding frameworks for Java is
now online at
http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/library/x-databdopt2/ This part
covers performance issues (Part 1 covers usage and features). Castor has
some weaknesses in this area, but hopefully these can be addressed
There's an easier alternative by using a SAX2 filter to strip
System_Query start and end tags. It doesn't look like Castor directly
exposes a way for you to do this, so you'd probably need to do something
like createHandler on the Unmarshaller to get a handler, then use a SAX2
parser with a fil
0x00 is not allowed in XML documents under any circumstances, entity
encoded or not - it's a value disallowed by the XML specification. The
whole control character range of 0x00-0x1F is disallowed except for the
whitespace charactres 0x09, 0x0A, and 0x0D. If you want the details
check the speci
Hi Dean,
I've looked at Castor performance from a larger perspective (not trying
to pinpoint where it's slow, just comparing it to other approaches). I
haven't seen speed differences of the sort you're talking about between
marshalling and unmarshalling - in my tests the marshalling is about 2-
, maybe some reference are not cleared during the
marshalling/unmarshalling process. We plan to do a profiling of Castor
once we are feature complete.
To optimize the performance, I advise you to use Xerces 2.Is there a
place where we can see the results of your test cases?
Arnaud
-Original
Considering the frequency with which this happens, why not deprecate the
static methods in the Marshaller and Unmarshaller classes and move them
into a helper class? That would be just as convenient for people who
want to use the default mapping, but would eliminate this very common
mistake wh
Jeff Lowery wrote:
>Hmmm... I might just get it in my head to write an article on Castor SQL
>mappings (unless Dennis Sosnoski beats me to it). I would save other dummies
>like myself a whole week of pain.
>
No plans on this front! I'd also love to see a good article on the SQL
My Castor article for IBM developerWorks has just been published at
http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-bindcastor/index.html.
I think it clarifies a couple of the issues that have come up on the
list lately, with examples for mapping collections and references. I'll
also be wr
The license included in the 0.9.3.9 download looks essentially
equivalent to the Apache license. It appears to allow anyone to modify
and/or redistribute the software, providing they do not use the names
"Exolab" or "Castor" for any modified versions but *do* credit the
Exolab project as the s
Let me add a vote for splitting the lists - current emails are split
between the two areas, but most people are probably only interested in
one area. Castor is a busy list, so cutting the volume in half would be
a real help.
I'm personally interested in the manual mapping from XML to Java (not
Whoops, the correct link for the JAXB JavaOne presentation is actually
http://servlet.java.sun.com/javaone/sf2002/conf/sessions/display-1602.en.jsp.
- Dennis
Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
> JAXB is actually in the middle of change of course right now. You can
> glean some of the informatio
14 matches
Mail list logo
