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? -- [email protected] | +491718691813 | http://twitter.com/johnapps -- -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jon Dyte Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2010 19:44 To: 0MQ development list Subject: Re: [zeromq-dev] Comparing OpenDDS and ZeroMQ Usage and Performance Martin Sustrik wrote: > I haven't read the article yet but it looks interesting: > > http://mnb.ociweb.com/mnb/MiddlewareNewsBrief-201004.html > > Martin > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > > seems to boil down to OpenDDS with it's strongly typed(corba idl or something similar) messages doing a round trip of 205 microseconds versus 0MQ + Google Protocol Buffers coming in at 216 microseconds. I'm surprised 0MQ isn't faster .... Jon _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
