Thanks for the responses. Just to clarify - I am not worried about the
total memory usage of marshalling and un-marshalling in this discussion. I
am just looking at how much memory from the HttpSession is used when I
store these objects there. If these "extra objects" would end up using
memory from the HttpSession please let us know. Otherwise it is a separate
discussion (some what related, may be, but a different sub-topic).
Thanks
Dennis Sosnoski
<dms_at_sosnoski.com To: JAXB-INTEREST_at_JAVA.SUN.COM
> cc:
Sent by: Subject: Re: is there a memory overhead
Discussion list
for the Java
Architecture for
XML Binding
<JAXB-INTEREST_at_JA
VA.SUN.COM>
05/29/2003 10:55
AM
Please respond to
Discussion list
for the Java
Architecture for
XML Binding
Kohsuke Kawaguchi wrote:
>Shashi Garje <SGarje_at_cccis.com> wrote:
>
>
>>I
>>would like to know whether there is an overhead associated with these
>>objects in terms of the memory they use as compared to a barebones Java
>>bean style object with the same getters and setters ?
>>
>
>The generated impl classes are just ordinary Java bean classes in terms
>of memory usage. So I wouldn't expect that much memory use compared with
>hand-written Java bean objects.
>
For what it's worth, in my tests it looked like the beta code was
keeping around extra objects created during unmarshalling, so the actual
memory usage was considerably larger than just the unmarshalled bean
classes. I've seen the same thing apparently happening at times with the
1.0 code, though not nearly as much. I'll try to get a better idea of
what's going on with this in some more tests this weekend.
Have there been any known issues of this type?
- Dennis