Benchmark it with some real work. Marshalling to native is expensive when doing micro benches with no work but not compared to going over the wire or messages that do real work , Serialization cost will normally be higher than marshalling to native . If your doing inter process via shared memory / pipes on the same machine and dont do anything with the message it may well be more expensive. On the other hand for large scale solutions where your messages stay in a queue for a while you can leave the message in native and not fill the GC and suffer GC pauses.
Note the JVM also incurs marshaling when communicating to the kernel say for tcp/ip which zeroMq does not . Ben On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 9:22 PM, crocket <crockabisc...@gmail.com> wrote: > Someone pointed out that ZeroMQ was great at communicaton between two or > more languages but that for communications in one language, internal > messaging solutions like akka and clojure.core.async would be a lot faster. > > He said marshalling was expensive. > > I looked into core.async, and I found it uses queues for asynchronicity. > > How would one compare core.async and ZeroMQ? > > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > >
_______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
