|
Espen Harlinn wrote: Which brings me back to my question about how to argument, in this case, against
the use of XML
I would argue that the only reason to have the extra overhead (XML output in this case) is to provide interop with java or something and other than that is an overhead that can be optimised out, for speed/performance/sanity
|
|
|
|
|
Which should be obvious, but obviously isn't and that's part of my problem.
|
|
|
|
|
then you should wield your senior architect powers and make an executive decision that cant be over ruled except by the chairman of the board!!! 
sounds like you have to justify to much detail to people that dont understand 
|
|
|
|
|
Which brings me back no why I'm missing a noXML movement - while I do find XML useful, it's not a silver bullet.
|
|
|
|
|
I hate XML for this reason. WAY too verbose. I have started to adopt YAML in my projects at work and am so far pretty happy with it.
|
|
|
|
|
Other responses suggest that issue of XML, is trivial compared to the other issue that you attempting to get sustained 100,000 transactions per second.
And your other response suggest that is a real need rather than just an optimal goal.
Consquently there are all sorts of problems that must be solved.
And using XML, especially with the ludicrous misuse you cited before is wrong. The protocol in such a case must have an extremely low overhead and XML does not fit that bill. That rate probably requires tweaking the network as well.
However if your requirements are otherwise then that additional information could be relevant.
|
|
|
|
|
jschell wrote: 100,000 transactions
Usually you use a deadband to filter away small changes in process data. I tend to prefer to rll encode the data, while companies like AspenTech proviedes the option to leverage more advanced compression techniques.
jschell wrote: And using XML, especially with the ludicrous misuse you cited before is wrong
These days a lot of people are very much into XML, and arguing against the use of XML, even when the case should be pretty obvious, is an uphill battle.
|
|
|
|
|
I have to support XML, Espen. I was working in retail, for Ace Hardware, when it first made an appearance. Back then we used EDI (Electronic Data Interchange) to transfer data between companies, and there was no standard at all. Every transaction had to be manually coded and decoded in order to do business with a supplier, and the costs were horrific. XML made possible the supply chain integration we take for granted today. Without it, we'd probably be paying twice to three times as much for every product we buy, simply because of the efficiency that XML has brought to the market. Unless you lived through that earlier time, you can't possibly imagine how tedious it was to order product to stock a store's shelves.
That being said, XML was created for that purpose, and it did a great job of filling that need. But today it seems to be used for everything imaginable, and often in entirely inappropriate ways. That needs to stop, but the value of XML for enabling retail data exchange is not lessened by the misuse of it in other fields.
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Wright wrote: Unless you lived through that earlier time
I did ... Think of this as a timeline: cp/m, mp/m, dos, dos/windows, xenix, os/2, windows nt, linux, 64-bit windows, and so on ...
Roger Wright wrote: But today it seems to be used for everything imaginable, and often in entirely inappropriate ways. That needs to stop, but the value of XML for enabling retail data exchange is not lessened by the misuse of it in other fields.
I agree - I want to be able to effectively argument for a standards compliant solution - one implementing standards that's made for the purpose of distributing real-time process data. DDS Interoperability Protocol as the backbone communication protocol with OPC UA for interoperability with an OPC focused environment seems to be a viable way to go, but its a hard sell.
|
|
|
|
|
Espen Harlinn wrote: its a hard sell
That doesn't make sense, but I believe you - I've run into it many times before. You want to use the right tool for the job, others think one tool fits all. Good luck! 
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Wright wrote: I have to support XML, Espen. I was working in retail, for Ace Hardware, when it
first made an appearance. Back then we used EDI (Electronic Data Interchange) to
transfer data between companies, and there was no standard at all. Every
transaction had to be manually coded and decoded in order to do business with a
supplier, and the costs were horrific. XML made possible the supply chain
integration we take for granted today. Without it, we'd probably be paying twice
to three times as much for every product we buy, simply because of the
efficiency that XML has brought to the market. Unless you lived through that
earlier time, you can't possibly imagine how tedious it was to order product to
stock a store's shelves.
What? You are specifically describing a B2B scenario which
1. Is specifically a good choice for XML
2. Has NOTHING like the volume cited here.
|
|
|
|
|
Espen Harlinn wrote: These days a lot of people are very much into XML, and arguing against the use
of XML, even when the case should be pretty obvious, is an uphill battle.
Batch the data, say 1000 formated fixed size ascii data points concatenated together into a single value and then put it into the following xml.
<count>1000
<value>...
That keeps the overhead low and it is still xml.
|
|
|
|
|
We're about to be replaced by baboons[^]
Which will replace us first, baboons or AI?
Brad
If you think you can, you will.
If you think you can't, you won't.
Either way, you're right.
|
|
|
|
|
I for one wish to welcome our blue-backsided overlords.
|
|
|
|
|
BRShroyer wrote: Which will replace us first, baboons or AI?
Both: AI based on baboons!
|
|
|
|
|
BRShroyer wrote: Which will replace us
Skynet
Why is common sense not common?
Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level where they are an expert.
Sometimes it takes a lot of work to be lazy
Please stand in front of my pistol, smile and wait for the flash - JSOP 2012
|
|
|
|
|
Most of my code has already been replaced by a baboon.
Don't blame me. I voted for Chuck Norris.
|
|
|
|
|
Who told you this is the real world? You are in matrix
Regards.
--------
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpfull answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
They're French Baboons! So, no worries!
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von Braun
|
|
|
|
|
It would take at least 2 flanges of baboons to replace me, I know some 8 letter words.
Henry Minute
Girl: (staring) "Why do you need an icy cucumber?"
“I want to report a fraud. The government is lying to us all.”
I wouldn't let CG touch my Abacus!
When you're wrestling a gorilla, you don't stop when you're tired, you stop when the gorilla is.
Cogito ergo thumb - Sucking my thumb helps me to think.
|
|
|
|
|
Savannah baboons have a daily toil of about 4 hours. After that, they are free to sleep, elephant, de-louse and generally mischieve around for the rest of the day. No way they are giving this life up - casual friday or not.
So, to make them take a job we would first have to take away the savannah.
Ergo, become a militant environment protecting hippie to protect your job.
|
|
|
|
|
Knocked this up for the family tonight, and it was uber yummy.
Fresh garlic paste, salt, butter and chives (didnt have any parsley) chopped and mashed up with the blade of the knife. Froze this in a sausage for 10 mins of so.
Slid a knife into the chicken breasts, opening a pocket inside, be leaving the entry hole as small as possible.
Slide in some of the frozen garlic chive butter mix.
Salt the chicken generously.
Flour it, dip it in beaten egg, and flour it again (it is normally flour, egg, breadcrumbs, but doidnt have any breadcrumbs, but in fact it is lighter with flour egg flour and not so greasy). Then in the pan and fry at a low to medium heat for 10 to 15 mins.
Serve with mashed spuds.
A classic, and damned yummy!
==============================
Nothing to say.
|
|
|
|
|
It is indeed good - with the breadcrumbs it tends to hold the butter in a bit better. They're pretty easy to make - stuff bread in a food processor and wizz it down...
You are complaining about greasyness when you stuffed the chicken with butter? 
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds good, any left overs?, I'm hungry now. 
|
|
|
|
|
Bit seventies but still quite tasty.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair.
nils illegitimus carborundum
me, me, me
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
