Re: Regarding my old mmap patch

At 04:03 AM 9/6/2006 +0200, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
>I certainly do use tidy regularily on > 1MB files.

I would think of 1MB as large wrt tidy.  One might describe anything a user 
has to wait more that 1 second for might qualify as "large".  Ergonomic 
studies show that wait times > 1.5 seconds let your mind wander and people 
notice the response time.  You want to allow time for other work besides tidy.

At 07:07 PM 9/5/2006 -0700, Cory Nelson wrote:
>The performance boost given by mmapping will be there regardless of file size.

OK, but this raises the larger question of how does tidy fit into your 
processing flow?  Is it a bottleneck (or even a runner up)?  Are live 
people waiting on the response for large files?  I guess I continue to be 
surprised that Tidy is anyone's performance bottleneck.  I know certain 
bulk web scraping projects (thinking of Mark Weaver) might  have this 
issue, but these are few and far between (or so I thought).

I'm not trying to be a pain.  I just want to justify the complexity.




-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642