On Thu, 03 Jul 2014 08:53:40 +0200 Patrick Ohly <[email protected]> said:
> On Thu, 2014-07-03 at 11:45 +0900, Carsten Haitzler wrote:
>
> > as such wraping every CAPI calll in an ipc call is not going to fly -
> > it's going to create nasty bottlenecks in a range of usages. this has to
> > be done intelligently and maybe it requires we go slowly and wrap 1 api
> > at a time, carefully redesigning the client-side lib to have minimal
> > round-trips and lots of client-side data shadowing. it may take longer
> > than expected. i just think we likeely nheed to account for this in
> > timelines and goals.
>
> Or we add the Cynara calls on the service side of the existing APIs,
> which presumably are already organized such that IPC is minimized. I
> would also hope that the services are written in a way that they
> validate incoming data.
that is indeed another option - assuming it actually is a service and doesnt go
direct to some sqlite db or file. :)
> SAPI started with the promise that implementing it is less work than
> modifying the underlying services ("we are thinking that more than 95%
> of the library can be treated that way" [= generating proxy/stub
> automatically]). If that's not the case, then we might as well work on
> enhancing the services.
>
> --
> Best Regards, Patrick Ohly
>
> The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
> I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
> represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
> on behalf of Intel on this matter.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/dev
>
--
Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) <[email protected]>
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/dev
