|
|
|
| Re: Binary Data Transfer Format [message #129664 is a reply to message #129216] |
Tue, 29 April 2008 16:18  |
 Holger Machens
Messages: 57
Registered: July 2009 |
Member |
|
|
Hello Stas,
thank you for your reply. Actually, I'm quite happy about the decision
to provide a binary format for data collection. :D
Of course, a binary format provides much better performance than
XML-based formats, that was not my point. I just thought it would be
less work to use an available serialisation/marshalling mechanism
instead of implementing and maintaining a proprietary one. The other
thing is, that those people, who implement a data provider for another
platform (e.g. for embedded or mobile devices) needs to implement (or
port) your proprietary format too. I think there are more arguments to
use standards, not on my mind yet.
But again, I'm quite happy with it.
Regards
Holger
Stas Polevic schrieb:
>> Can you tell me the reasons why you decided against usage of well
>> established binary communication protocols like RMI, CORBA, RPC etc.?
> We have Agent Controller technology which mostly substitutes above
> protocols and it cannot be just thrown away.
>
>> Is it more efficient?
> From the profiler side it is more efficient to have specialized data
> format instead of wasting time on generating some external format like XML.
> Thus we have a chance for more relevant performance time.
>
> Measured performance boost is about 30%.
>
>
> Holger Machens wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>
>> in bugzilla I saw, you are developing the Binary Data Transfer Format
>> (alternative to the XML-based format used in data collection framework).
>> It looks like a proprietary format for me.
>> Can you tell me the reasons why you decided against uusage of well
>> established binary communication protocols like RMI, CORBA, RPC etc.?
>> Is it more efficient?
>
>> Thanks in advance
>
>> Regards
>> Holger
>
>
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03039 seconds
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
