Zeromq vs. dbus
thiago at kde.org
Thu Aug 5 13:37:52 PDT 2010
On Thursday 5. August 2010 17.02.53 Ville M. Vainio wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Havoc Pennington <hp at pobox.com> wrote:
> > It's apples and oranges. (though I'm sure zeromq is much faster.) dbus
> > has nothing to do with distributed messaging really, and does a lot of
> > stuff that isn't done by a system like zeromq.
> Right. I was thinking whether zeromq is outrageously faster than dbus
> (for applications where zeromq is enough), or whether it's just ~ 2
> times faster. It might also be interesting to use file descriptor
> passed by dbus for zeromq messaging.
Again, you're comparing apples and oranges.
D-Bus uses Unix sockets with message semantics. But it has a lot on top of
that. And the worst part where D-Bus loses performance is the message
validation. So it's not really fair to compare a system that sends bytes over
the wall to the other side, to a system that not only understands what those
bytes are, but also validates them.
Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
Senior Product Manager - Nokia, Qt Development Frameworks
PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint:
E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C 966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 190 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
More information about the dbus