[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       freedesktop-dbus
Subject:    Re: About performance of D-Bus
From:       "Jerome Philbert" <jerome.philbert () gmail ! com>
Date:       2008-11-05 15:41:31
Message-ID: 9c0d19af0811050741y4fd7377ci43daed0f3d0319a8 () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]


In your previous email, you also suggest :

-did not try to "multiplex" code modules with "path registration" or
"handler registration"

What do you mean exactly ?

Jerome



2008/11/5 Havoc Pennington <hp@pobox.com>

> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 8:41 AM, Jerome Philbert
> <jerome.philbert@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I think I have also tried your suggestions number 3 and 4.
> > Is not it equivalent to:
> > - remove paranoid validation ? (by using
> > DBUS_VALIDATION_MODE_WE_TRUST_THIS_DATA_ABSOLUTELY in the code)
> > - build D-Bus with disable-checks option ?
> > In this way, I have measured that D-Bus was 7% faster.
> >
>
> I think if you wrote a library from scratch, you could disable even
> more validation, basically - write code that would just crash and burn
> horribly on invalid data, that never checked anything at all, but was
> pretty fast.
>
> If you profile just plain raw sockets with no protocol parsing,
> exchanging messages in a blocking way, that will tell you what the
> absolute theoretical fastest library you could write would be like.
>
> Havoc
>

[Attachment #5 (text/html)]

In your previous email, you also suggest :<br><pre>-did not try to \
&quot;multiplex&quot; code modules with &quot;path registration&quot; \
or<br>&quot;handler registration&quot;</pre>What do you mean exactly \
?<br><br>Jerome<br> <br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2008/11/5 Havoc Pennington \
<span dir="ltr">&lt;<a \
href="mailto:hp@pobox.com">hp@pobox.com</a>&gt;</span><br><blockquote \
class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt \
0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> Hi,<br>
<br>
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 8:41 AM, Jerome Philbert<br>
<div class="Ih2E3d">&lt;<a \
href="mailto:jerome.philbert@gmail.com">jerome.philbert@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br> \
</div><div class="Ih2E3d">&gt; I think I have also tried your suggestions number 3 \
and 4.<br> &gt; Is not it equivalent to:<br>
&gt; - remove paranoid validation ? (by using<br>
&gt; DBUS_VALIDATION_MODE_WE_TRUST_THIS_DATA_ABSOLUTELY in the code)<br>
&gt; - build D-Bus with disable-checks option ?<br>
&gt; In this way, I have measured that D-Bus was 7% faster.<br>
&gt;<br>
<br>
</div>I think if you wrote a library from scratch, you could disable even<br>
more validation, basically - write code that would just crash and burn<br>
horribly on invalid data, that never checked anything at all, but was<br>
pretty fast.<br>
<br>
If you profile just plain raw sockets with no protocol parsing,<br>
exchanging messages in a blocking way, that will tell you what the<br>
absolute theoretical fastest library you could write would be like.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
Havoc<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br>



_______________________________________________
dbus mailing list
dbus@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dbus


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]