> Really? I had the impression that DBus was able to do direct > client-to-client communication as well from the docs (they write: "Also, > the message bus is built on top of a general one-to-one message passing > framework, which can be used by any two apps to communicate directly > (without going through the message bus daemon).").
Actually this is true, but I've never used or looked at this feature. I've only ever used dbus by communicating through a bus daemon. I'll do some research on this to see if we can use it. > Because of that, I'd really like to see > > * better understanding of the group access control issue I'll do some research on this aswell. > * performance evaluation (memory overhead, CPU impact); > i.e. we could compare creating 100,000 IPC channels and > between 4,000 processes and sending 10,000,000 messages > (of different sizes, say 4-32k bytes, in both directions > query-response style). I'll try and setup some experiments to measure this and see if it's feasible. > * some sample modifications for client and service code (i.e. for > just the DHT service) And if all the above looks good I'll get started on this aswell! I don't know how much time I'll have to work on all this but hopefully I'll be able to get back to you within the next couple of weeks with some results :) > I hope you understand why I'm not just giving you a green light > on this --- this would really be a major change and I'd really > want to be sure that this is the right direction. That's completely understandable. > p.s.: why did you take this off-list? Silly mistake. I just hit 'reply' in thunderbird and thought that would reply to the list. _______________________________________________ GNUnet-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers
