On ven, 2014-06-27 at 14:09 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote: > On Fri, 2014-06-27 at 12:41 +0200, José Bollo wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I just published details of a measurement of the time overhead cost of > > using SAPI. > > Just to be clear, this is the fixed overhead for making a method call > via the IPC mechanism used by SAPI, right?
yes, what is studied is the cost of wrapping simple message, pass it and get the answer. Also the case of passing callbacks automatically. What is made using FFI closures. > More interesting for the discussion is something else: how much slower > (in percent) will SAPI be compared to CAPI? For that, one needs to look > at which method calls will be wrapped by SAPI - all of the CAPI methods > or only some? No. > As Carsten pointed out in his email from June 16th, if CAPI has method > calls which execute locally in the process at the moment and SAPI > replaces that with remote procedure calls, then performance will be > considerably slower. If these methods get called often, then this will > matter. But this have issues: where is the context? In the client or in the server? That might be a nightmare. Thus, for first, we are studying the worst case, when all call are passed to the server. > Has this been considered and/or investigated? I agree with you. That it is really needed. The best is to pass bench on real programs to see the effect on true world. Best regards José _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/dev
