--nextPart24132912.IdJnZWK4um
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

Olaf Jan Schmidt wrote:
>A test made a while ago claimed that D-Bus is 18x slower than ORBit2
> (and 3 times slower than DCOP):
>http://eleceng.dit.ie/frank/rpc/CORBAGnomeDBUSPerformanceAnalysis.pdf

That test is laughable. Don't take it seriously any more than you take=20
seriously any kiddie's benchmarking. It does some very weird testing and=20
comes up with pretty inconsequential conclusions. String comparisons?!=20
Please...

>* The main reason described in the analysis is the lack of caching for
> DCOP and D-Bus. Would it be possible to add it?

Caching of what?

>* Is D-Bus using sockets for local communication to improve the speed,
> such as ORBit2 does? If not, would it make sense to change that?

Yes, it's using sockets. What else would it be using?

Now, libdbus-1 can use some optimisation in the marshalling code. My own=20
tests indicate it can be slow. But compared to the two task-switches=20
necessary to actually relay data to a remote process, that's negligible.

=2D-=20
=A0 Thiago Macieira =A0- =A0thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
=A0 =A0 PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint:
=A0 =A0 E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C =A0966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358

--nextPart24132912.IdJnZWK4um
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBFCH+RM/XwBW70U1gRAtGNAJ9b5o7WGFz3oD1nXoYwa0UkQqwbeQCfTNir
f/EdWGgzIMYP3zMthmHPdI4=
=8Rce
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nextPart24132912.IdJnZWK4um--