[This message was posted by Rolf Andersson of Pantor Engineering 
<[email protected]> to the "FAST Protocol" discussion forum at 
http://fixprotocol.org/discuss/46. You can reply to it on-line at 
http://fixprotocol.org/discuss/read/ac5c73d9 - PLEASE DO NOT REPLY BY MAIL.]

LiuAn,

ZLIB is a generic text compression library based on the LZ77 (Lempel Ziv 1977) 
family of compression algorithms. It allows you to compress any message stream 
without reconfiguration or adaptation so in that sense ZLIB is less complex to 
deploy. I would argue that this difference is small given that the 
implementation of a feed is content specific anyway.

The implementation (ie. the code) of FAST and ZLIB respectively are fairly 
complex but (having implemented both) I believe FAST is easier to implement 
than ZLIB.

As there are FAST and ZLIB implementations available, you don't have to go to 
the trouble of actually doing your own implementation but can instead use an 
existing implementation.

ZLIB and ZLIB-like implementations have been used by the CME, OMX (SAXESS and 
CLICK), Nasdaq (ITCH) and others. As far as I know, CME has discontinued its 
use of ZLIB and OMX has discontinued at least some of their use of a ZLIB-like 
implementation. Not sure if ITCH compression is still being offered.

The big drawbacks with ZLIB is its relatively high processing overhead and its 
reliance on a long history of data to compress effectively. As a consequence 
ZLIB in not well-suited for high performance situations nor when UDP over 
multicast is used.

It has been shown that the processing overhead of ZLIB is more than 30 times 
higher than FAST in some use cases. The compression ratios of ZLIB and FAST are 
comparable for TCP streams and FAST has much better compression efficiency for 
in the UDP case.

In summary, if you plan to provide a low to medium thruput market data feed 
which is not latency sensitive and you plan to use TCP as your transport, then 
ZLIB could used to compress your data.

For other scenarios I would recommend that you review the commercial 
alternatives available for deploying a FAST-based feed.

Best,
Rolf

> Hi all,
> 
> I'm considering to compress market data messages using zlib.
> 
> I found some discussions in this forum regarding zlib v.s. FAST. From 
> performance point of view, FAST is a better choice. But FAST seems to be more 
> complex in implementation.
> 
> I'd like to know if zlib is considered a valid implemetation for the market 
> data compression?  Is it used by anybody in production?
> 
> Thanks & Regards,
> LiuAn


[You can unsubscribe from this discussion group by sending a message to 
mailto:[email protected]]

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Financial Information eXchange" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/fix-protocol?hl=en.

Reply via email to