Hi again, I've just run some tests comparing mono to .net. It is exaclty the same code compiled with .NET but run with .NET and mono. The test case is a server (actually the plastic server) with the data cached and a client. So only serialization/deserialization play the game, no other processing is required. The data is about 2Mb. The test is run on a 1.5GHz Pentium M laptop with 1.5GB Ram.
The time is average time after 10 runs. mono server + mono client -> 630ms mono server + .net client -> 721 ms .net server + .net client -> 1150 ms .net server + mono client -> 980 ms So it looks like mono serialization is much faster. I'm afraid the rest of the code is a bit slower running with Mono than .NET on my small test case (not the one I showed but another one not caching data). One question: is it recommended to compile with Mono to get better perfomance? I guess the answer but I just want to be sure. Thanks! pablo ----- Original Message ----- From: "pablosantosluac" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com>; "Robert Jordan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 12:52 PM Subject: Re: [Mono-dev] Serialization performance + remoting > Thanks Robert. > > So, you mean it is better to pass an array of objects than actually a > list?? > Ok, I was already using arrays but I'll take it into account... > > pablo > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robert Jordan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com> > Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 10:52 AM > Subject: Re: [Mono-dev] Serialization performance + remoting > > >> Hi Pablo, >> >> pablosantosluac wrote: >>> Because the people who actually implemented both serialization and >>> remoting >>> are in this list :-) I'd like to ask them to share with us some tips to >>> improve performance in serialization/remoting: I don't know, maybe >>> always >>> reduce the number of objects involved (unwrap the structures into >>> communication specific ones), get rid of some methods, avoid some data >>> types... whatever... >> >> Employing a remoting facade is the way to go, IMHO, even if it's >> not that hype. Try to keep the data exchange classes as flat as possible >> (struct-like, avoid lists [replace them with typed arrays], etc.). >> >> Robert >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Mono-devel-list mailing list >> Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com >> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list > > _______________________________________________ > Mono-devel-list mailing list > Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list _______________________________________________ Mono-devel-list mailing list Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
