PureXML

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • Mark A
    #1

    PureXML

    Does PureXML use bufferpools for all the data stored?

    I am assuming that PureXML is faster than XML Extender at shredding data,
    but is not faster than relational (without LOB's) in cases where there are
    no XML documents (other than people trying to force a schema into an XML
    document).


    Tags: None
    • Serge Rielau
      #2
      Re: PureXML

      Mark A wrote:
      Does PureXML use bufferpools for all the data stored?
      As far as I know only inlined (aka small) XML documents in DB2 9.5.
      I am assuming that PureXML is faster than XML Extender at shredding data,
      PureXML does not shred data.
      but is not faster than relational (without LOB's) in cases where there are
      no XML documents (other than people trying to force a schema into an XML
      document).
      Well, XML documents don't fall out the sky I s'pose.
      XML can be a better approach than relational when the schema evolves a
      lot. If you have trouble making (and keeping) it square.. XML may be
      your friend.

      Cheers
      Serge

      --
      Serge Rielau
      DB2 Solutions Development
      IBM Toronto Lab

        Comment

        • Mark A
          #3
          Re: PureXML

          "Serge Rielau" <srielau@ca.ibm .comwrote in message
          news:6epk8hF86u aqU1@mid.indivi dual.net...
          Well, XML documents don't fall out the sky I s'pose.
          XML can be a better approach than relational when the schema evolves a
          lot. If you have trouble making (and keeping) it square.. XML may be your
          friend.
          >
          Cheers
          Serge
          --
          Serge Rielau
          DB2 Solutions Development
          IBM Toronto Lab
          I do understand the advantages of XML schemas, but now I need some
          information of performance.

          I have seen the performance comparison between PureXML and XML Extender, but
          I am particularly interested in the performance differences between PureXML
          and relational.

          If PureXML just uses CLOBs then I already have numbers for the difference
          between a CLOB and VARCHAR (or any relational schema without a CLOB).

          In the implementation I am looking at, large documents are not really
          involved, and all individual segments(?) of the XML schema (what we call
          columns in relational) are less than 1K. I want to make sure I am not
          misunderstandin g something about how PureXML data is stored in this type of
          situation. In other words, if each segment (column) is small, can it be
          configured to use DB2 bufferpools, or does the whole XML document have to be
          small?..


            Comment

            • Serge Rielau
              #4
              Re: PureXML

              Thanks Matthias!

              --
              Serge Rielau
              DB2 Solutions Development
              IBM Toronto Lab

                Comment

                Previous template Next
                Working...