I'll try to have some patches out soon.
In regards to XMLBeans replacement, I naturally prefer to use JAXB which
does not require any additional libraries -
Unless it poses some limitations on what POI needs.

See the following comparison:
http://java.dzone.com/articles/how-does-jaxb-compare-xmlbeans

-----Original Message-----
From: Andreas Beeker [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 5, 2014 00:35
To: POI Developers List
Subject: Re: Performanc​e issues related to XMLBeans

Hi Yaniv,

> Let’s discuss a way to do this across the board –
Sorry for not answering you first mail ...
The changes to the xmlbeans call seem to be reasonable - +1 from me.
I'm curious to see, if for instance the clean sweep algorithm in #51585 gets
even faster ... ;)

> I’m able to contribute by either supplying patches or committing
> myself – I’m already a committer for other projects and have a CLA.
If this won't been dealt by someone else in the meantime, I'll do the
changes after I finished with my current stuff, but that will take a while
...

> The XMLBeans recommendation is that when accessing long XML documents,
> or when performance matters, one should use XmlCursor and not
> getXXXList().
>
> Obviously performance matters for POI users, especially for big XLSX
> files, so this is very much relevant,
>
> but I’m not sure converting to XmlCursor would be easy –
>
> replacing XmlBeans with another library might even be preferable.
Out of curiosity, which library would have in mind?
Although we partly replaced xmlbeans with JiBX @ work, I don't know if it's
possible with it to manipulate xml data where not all of the schema is
available at runtime or the data is not 100% schema conform.


Best wishes,
Andi




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional
commands, e-mail: [email protected]

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to