[zeromq-dev] Comparing OpenDDS and ZeroMQ Usage and Performance
ph at imatix.com
Sat Jun 19 23:24:49 CEST 2010
As the article says for each test, each run produces different figures. It
is somewhat deceptive to quote usec figures on boxes that run random
processes with non RT kernels. A proper test would use two clean boxes and a
dedicated switch. Note that these tests are done by the guys who make
Sent from my Android mobile phone.
On Jun 19, 2010 9:37 PM, "Apps, John" <john.apps at hp.com> wrote:
These are the summary data points.
OpenDDS Raw Buffer 185 usec
ZeroMQ Raw Buffer 170 usec
Boost.Asio Raw Buffer 75 usec
OpenDDS .NET Object streamed through a Raw Buffer 630 usec
ZeroMQ .NET Object streamed through a Raw Buffer 537 usec
Boost.Asio .NET Object streamed through a Raw Buffer 413 usec
OpenDDS Strongly Typed Data 205
ZeroMQ Strongly Typed Data with Boost Serialization 577 usec
Boost.Asio Strongly Typed Data with Boost Serialization 396 usec
ZeroMQ Strongly Typed Data with Google Protocol Buffers 216 usec
I think an expert eye should be cast over these numbers... In addition, a
message length of 1000 is probably a bit more than 0MQ is optimized for?
-- John.Apps at hp.com | +491718691813 | http://twitter.com/johnapps --
From: zeromq-dev-bounces at lists.zeromq.org [mailto:zeromq-dev-bounces at li...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the zeromq-dev