XML size (was: no subject)

Paul Lussier plussier@mindspring.com
Wed, 03 Apr 2002 23:51:12 -0500

In a message dated: 03 Apr 2002 20:58:02 EST
Derek Atkins said:

>Paul Lussier <plussier@mindspring.com> writes:
>> Right, but now you've locked yourself into a DB server which needs to 
>> run on the system, and you're no longer talking about something small 
>> and embedded like Berkeley-DB.  This may improve performance of the 
>We were never talking about Berkeley-DB.

Someone mentioned the possibility, I don't remember who, but if it's 
important, I'll go and dig up the post.  I don't think it matters 
though, since we agree that Berkeley-DB isn't being discussed any 
longer :)

>I for one was looking at MySQL.  SQLite would work but the datafiles
>are not host-independent.


>No.. MySQL has an embedded server.  You do NOT need another process
>running.  The SQL server would be part of Gnucash.  Take a look
>at www.mysql.com/

Okay, I thought someone mentioned MySQL, and someone else stated that 
it wouldn't work.  Maybe I mis-interpreted.  I apologize if I did and 
caused further confusion.

>I don't think it's going to be a small gain, especially over time.
>But there is no way to tell until it's actually implemented.  However,
>without even coding it yet, I will bet you a beer that if you compare
>the startup, data access, data modification, and shutdown of Gnucash
>on the same machine using the same data stored in either XML or
>embedded SQL that you will find the SQL to be faster, and the more
>data you have the faster the SQL will be.

I'll only bet the beer if the ascii import/export features are coded 
in at the same time :)

>> I still maintain that for the average home user, the flat ascii text 
>> file is the best bet.
>Again, I disagree with you.  My parents couldn't care less what file
>format their data is.  They care about usability of the application,
>and part of that usability is speed of startup, speed of shutdown, and
>speed of data access/modification.

Well, I wasn't saying that the average home user cares about the flat 
ascii text file, I was trying to make the point that it's better for 
them since they don't need to also run an SQL server as well, and 
therefore less complex.  But, since you've cleared me up on the fact 
that MySQL has an embeddable server, and it would be self contained, 
then I retract that statement and concede :)