Re: Orbit Performance Questions

[Michael Meeks <michael ximian com>]

Hi Dave,

On Fri, 2002-01-04 at 17:22, dahaverk@rockwellcollins.com wrote:
> Suffice it to say....  ORBit 0.5.8-12 is slightly faster than ACE TAO on
> most things.   ACE TAO does have slightly better handling of CORBA Any's
> though and isn't a slouch.  Also, ORBit win's on the executable size
> comparason.  MICO and ACE TAO are HUGE.   Thus, not very suitable for
> embedded systems.

	Ah - I'm glad you said that; since ORBit2 should be somewhat smaller
than ORBit, if no faster :-)

> I would like to see an ORBit2 version that is sub-settable to meet the
> "minimum-CORBA" specification.  (i.e. No Dynamic stuff)

	We're pretty minimal; in ORBit2 it should be easy to kill the
dynamicany stuff, just by removing the library from the link in
ORBit2/src/orb/Makefile.am; nothing else there can really go though.

>   Plus, for
> embedded work I'd like to eliminate "Any" handling.  Although I don't think
> that is called out in the OMG specifications.  Removal of "Any's" and the
> associated Marshalling to handle them can reduce the footprint even
> further.

	Ah - well; this will be no saving in ORBit2 - since we only use a
generic approach that can easily be re-used for Anys. I think more
savings could be had by chopping great chunks out of the POA - in terms
of crazy options / exceptions.

	Interesting,

		Michael.

-- 
 mmeeks@gnu.org  <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot