https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61213
PJ Fanning changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEEDINFO|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61213
--- Comment #6 from PJ Fanning ---
I did some initial testing and the Stax based code is significantly slower. I
will spend a little more time to see if the performance can be improved.
https://github.com/pjfanning/poi-sxssf-stax - not very sci
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61213
Dominik Stadler changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||60707
Referenced Bugs:
https://bz.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61213
--- Comment #5 from Dominik Stadler ---
You can take a look at the FAQ at http://poi.apache.org/faq.html#faq-N10165, it
points to a sample which we used for comparing raw performance of
HSSF/XSSF/SXSSF in the past.
--
You are receiving this m
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61213
--- Comment #4 from PJ Fanning ---
Thanks Dominik - I would expect some performance impact but I think it is more
robust for the code not to make assumptions about file encodings etc. I also
think the SAX code is easier to understand.
StAX pars
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61213
Dominik Stadler changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |NEEDINFO
Severity|normal
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61213
PJ Fanning changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #35073|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61213
--- Comment #1 from PJ Fanning ---
Created attachment 35073
--> https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35073&action=edit
use Stax to parse the worksheet data
I can merge this if it is ok
--
You are receiving this mail because:
Yo
