[Accessibility] FSGA Teleconference Agenda, Wednesday 28 June
jrb at redhat.com
Wed Jul 12 09:01:34 PDT 2006
[ adding John to the CC list ]
On Wed, 2006-07-12 at 10:55 -0400, Willie Walker wrote:
> > With respect to to the standard, we can always migrate from today's
> > CORBA implementation to tomorrow's DBUS implementation
> I've seen Frank Duignan's performance analysis work that provides
> numbers to the effect that DBUS is approximately 18 times slower than
> I'm curious if there's been any response to Frank's work? I'd be
> especially interested in what the DBUS developers have to say. Is the
> analysis accurate/fair? Does the testing mechanism correlate to how we
> use CORBA for the AT-SPI? Is there low hanging fruit in the DBUS
> performance tree? Etc.
That's a pretty interesting paper. Is the benchmark code available
anywhere? Two immediate thoughts there are:
1. DBus on FC5 shipped with all the runtime message integrity checks on
by default. The intention is to turn that off for DBus 1.0, but it adds
an overhead right now.
2. That test is using the glib DBus bindings instead of the raw DBus
interface. The glib bindings are known to be quite inefficient (lots of
message copies), and are being rewritten.
Of course, it could turn out that dbus is 17 times slower. It would be
cool to have that benchmark to play with to make sure.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/accessibility/attachments/20060712/43ef9446/attachment.pgp
More information about the Accessibility