[JDEV] GZipping Jabber Messages

[David Waite]

Ignoring computational costs, the biggest technical hurdle will probably be
that, because of compression, the boundary between two XML Packets is not
guaranteed to be the boundary between bytes in the resulting compressed
stream. Messages might not be interpreted until more data arrives, and thus
packets sit waiting for more compressable data to arrive indefinately.

You could compress each packet individually, but you will lose much of the
repetativeness across packets which could be eliminated.

-David Waite

----- Original Message -----
From: "Julian Missig" <julian at jabber.org>
To: <jdev at jabber.org>
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 2:57 PM
Subject: Re: [JDEV] GZipping Jabber Messages


> Nah, I think they're talking about gzipping all of the data, sending it,
> and ungzipping before sending it to the XML parser on the other side,
> just like SSL works.
>
> Julian
> --
> email: julian at jabber.org
> jabber:julian at jabber.org
>
> Michael F Lin wrote:
>
>  > Keep in mind that the gzip data would have to be base64 coded, which
>  > would increase its size by 33%. So you can run the statistics and
>  > figure out how long your payloads have to be to get better than 33%
>  > compression ratios with gzip, but I imagine it is quite long
>  > relative to the average since of a Jabber packet
>  > (message/presence/iq).
>  >
>  > -Mike
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > Adam Theo
>  >  <adamtheo at theoret        To:       jdev <jdev at jabber.org>
>  >  ic.com>                  cc:
>  >  Sent by:                 Subject:  [JDEV] GZipping Jabber Messages
>  >  jdev-admin at jabber
>  >  .org
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > 01/04/2002 03:32
>  >  PM
>  >  Please respond to
>  >  jdev
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > Hi, all. There's a good discussion going on over at the DotGNU
>  > Developer list about gzip'ing the XML that is transmitted around on
>  > the DotGNU platform.
>  >
>  > Was wondering if it would be possible to incorporate the same thing
>  > for future versions of the Jabber server? Is it feasible, anyway?
>  > They are saying the trade-offs for extra resource consumption would
>  > not be bad at all if designed into the server properly, and would
>  > reduce bandwidth very dramatically (like by 80%, i think). This
>  > would be useful for high-volume servers with enough processing
>  > power, i think...
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jdev mailing list
> jdev at jabber.org
> http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
>