[zeromq-dev] Comparing OpenDDS and ZeroMQ Usage and Performance

Pieter Hintjens 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
opendds.

-Pieter

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
usec
 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 --



-----Original Message-----
From: zeromq-dev-bounces at lists.zeromq.org [mailto:zeromq-dev-bounces at li...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.zeromq.org/pipermail/zeromq-dev/attachments/20100619/9efa4da5/attachment.html>


More information about the zeromq-dev mailing list