As the article says for each test, each run produces different figures. It is somewhat deceptive to quote usec figures on boxes that run random processes with non RT kernels. A proper test would use two clean boxes and a dedicated switch. Note that these tests are done by the guys who make opendds.
-Pieter Sent from my Android mobile phone. On Jun 19, 2010 9:37 PM, "Apps, John" <john.a...@hp.com> wrote: These are the summary data points. OpenDDS Raw Buffer 185 usec ZeroMQ Raw Buffer 170 usec Boost.Asio Raw Buffer 75 usec OpenDDS .NET Object streamed through a Raw Buffer 630 usec ZeroMQ .NET Object streamed through a Raw Buffer 537 usec Boost.Asio .NET Object streamed through a Raw Buffer 413 usec OpenDDS Strongly Typed Data 205 usec ZeroMQ Strongly Typed Data with Boost Serialization 577 usec Boost.Asio Strongly Typed Data with Boost Serialization 396 usec ZeroMQ Strongly Typed Data with Google Protocol Buffers 216 usec I think an expert eye should be cast over these numbers... In addition, a message length of 1000 is probably a bit more than 0MQ is optimized for? -- john.a...@hp.com | +491718691813 | http://twitter.com/johnapps -- -----Original Message----- From: zeromq-dev-boun...@lists.zeromq.org [mailto:zeromq-dev-boun...@li...
_______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
