Yeah; Uwe’s story is also as I understand it. IMO the dependencies aren’t worth it unless someone demonstrably proves otherwise. Given that SolJ mostly uses javabin (response by default but not request; and requests tend to be small), XML performance is less of an issue as well. ~ David
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 8:31 AM Uwe Schindler <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > > > There is not a direct dependency. The STAX-parser shipped with the JDK is > too slow (said by some people). I am not sure if this is still true with > Java 7 and Java 8, but In Java 6 it was! When having Woodstock in > classpath, it plugs this XML parser into the JDK with SPI (like our lucene > codecs). Solr should work without woodstox, but you may have slower XML > imports (StAX is used by UpdateHandler#XMLLoader only). > > > > Uwe > > > > ----- > > Uwe Schindler > > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen > > http://www.thetaphi.de > > eMail: [email protected] > > > > *From:* Varun Thacker [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Thursday, August 27, 2015 1:41 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Remove woodstox-core-asl and stax2-api dependencies from Solr? > > > > I could not find any dependencies on these libraries. Did I miss anything > or is it safe to remove them? > > > > -- > > > > Regards, > Varun Thacker > -- Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com
