Re: Orbit Performance Questions
- From: Michael Meeks <michael ximian com>
- To: orbit-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: Orbit Performance Questions
- Date: 04 Jan 2002 22:22:30 +0000
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
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]