Hi,
If you choose to do something using an XML compliant language, you can't be
very concerned with performance to begin with! (:=)
Steve
On 25 Jun 2003, you wrote in comp.databases.oracle.server:
> "koert54" <nospam_at_nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:<YBmKa.687$P26.1691_at_afrodite.telenet-ops.be>...
>
>> http://www.interealm.com/tao/parchxml.html
>>
>
> LOL!
> <quote>
> Disgraced, the IT Architect rose from the table, quickly excused
> himself from the meeting and was never heard from again.
> </quote>
>
> If only! I once had a GSA "architect" impose on me that
> it was faster to offload data from Oracle into a flat file,
> sort it using Solaris quick-sort and then upload it again
> than it was to sort it inside Oracle. When I pointed out
> the flat file data for the sort would be around 60Gb, the
> reply was : "so?".
> So I let him prove it. Haven't seen him again anywhere
> with the tag of "architect". There is a God!
>
> PS: Now we have XML architects. Myself and our Java guru spent
> an afternoon explaining to one why it wasn't a good idea to
> write an entire framework just to cache and sort XML-based entity
> Java Beans when it takes three orders of magnitude less overhead
> to get the rows off the database in the order he wanted,
> already as DOM-trees.
>
> His main concern was string searches and sorts are "very
> heavy" and could cause the database server to thrash.
> Number of users? 20.
>
> But I'm sure it's just me...
> Cheers
> Nuno Souto
> wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au.nospam
Received on Fri Jun 27 2003 - 11:39:44 CDT
