Re: Development Trends in Web and Oracle

From: Noons <wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au>
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 00:00:02 +1100
Message-ID: <4232e7cb$0$5484$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au>

Hexathioorthooxalate apparently said,on my timestamp of 12/03/2005 11:46 PM:

>>The overhead?  36*2+1 longer to process a single byte.
>>How fast a modern CPU works is completely irrelevant.

>
>
> So you are saying the argument against storing XML in the database is a cost
> overhead for a bit of verbosity? That can't be the basis of your argument,
> surely?

There is NO "so you are saying". What I said is PERFECTLY clear and understandable: an overhead of 73 times longer is NOT a "bit" of verbosity. It is bleeding obvious it is totally unnecessary and redundant.

You want to give it your own spin, go right ahead. But it is YOUR spin.

-- 
Cheers
Nuno Souto
in sunny Sydney, Australia
wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au.nospam

Received on Sat Mar 12 2005 - 07:00:02 CST