Does it mean JeroMQ incurs marshalling when communicating to the kernel?
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 12:21 AM, Bennie Kloosteman <[email protected]>wrote: > 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 <[email protected]> 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 >> [email protected] >> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > 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
