From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <4C1F05E7-B327-480A-91F3-055076377C99@fastmail.fm> <3633bacf2efc9da1b911893b4029531b@coraid.com> Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 11:43:37 -0700 Message-ID: From: ron minnich To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: Re: [9fans] xml Topicbox-Message-UUID: 3bdad0a8-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 11:25 AM, David Leimbach wrote: > > Eventually you'll find that the entire world became a nail for the XML > hammer and that things like SOAP, XML-RPC, are just not very good due to the > fact that sending XML documents on a wire for simple RPC calls is grossly > inefficient, and there's a lot better technology out there for these sorts > of things. as long as you don't care about the (observed) 100:1 ratio of XML glop to data in, e.g., the Python XMLRPC stuff, it's great. Yep, I observed that ratio when Xen made the cut to XML-RPC: 3000 bytes of RPC to send 30 bytes of data. It's impressive: gigE gets reduced to 10 Mb ethernet in no time; XML-RPC turns the network clock back by 20 years. Software choices have hardware consequences. > That said,XML is still here, and you kind of have to learn to play ball > with it. Funny, I at first read this as "That's sad, XML is still here, ..." Then I had to re-read it. ron