On 27 March 2014 16:48, Charles Remes <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mar 27, 2014, at 4:41 AM, Alexander V Vershilov < > [email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > I’m trying to write a small benchmark program using zeromq-4.0.4 that will > be used as a > prototype for higher level library. Test program creates a pair of > asynchronous sockets and > send a bunch of messages with no acknowledgement and a the end reads a > reply. > > > Surprisingly, this test program does not compare favourably with an > equivalent direct > implementation over TCP. I have the following timings for sending 10,000 > messages of the > given size on the localhost: > > > This is surprising. > > > Is there something I am misunderstanding here? I have gone through several > `iterations of > my benchmarks, but perhaps you can point out any problem with it? > > > > Have you tried comparing your results to the built-in local_lat/remote_lat > and local_thr/remote_thr benchmark programs? You could easily modify the > throughput benchmark to use PUSH/PULL sockets and see if the results differ > wildly from the pub/sub results. >
I've tried the tests from local_thr/remote_thr they are also use PUSH/PULL socket pair. The only difference is that that benchmarks are preparing message 'zmq_msg_init_size' and then 'zmq_sendmsg', while in my benchmark I'm just using zemq_send, this better reflect TCP case. New variant gives me extra ~2-10kMb/s depending on the message size. However TCP is still faster, except very big messages where it's on par with ZeroMQ. Thanks. -- Alexander Vershilov mail-to: [email protected]
_______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
