[boost] "Re: serialization performance"

From: bwood (brass_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-11-14 16:31:29

This is a MIME encoded message.

--=_1e6ef2fcf96d9a3743040e8d704581df
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Martin Slater wrote:
>> //build oArch. 
>> Ebenezer: 
>> msgs.Send(buffer, lst); // where I didn't remove anything 
>> // from Send's implementation. 
>> 
>> I think as you say, whether a flush gets embedded in the Send 
>> function should be configurable, but right now it just is. 
>> I'll admit it would be better if I didn't have to remove (#if 0) 
>> the end of the Send function, but I don't think that invalidates 
>> anything. 
>
>This I humbly disagree with, from a user point of view I would not 
>want to patch either library to get optimal performance, If it is 
>there and required then tests need to be done with it in. It would 
>be simple to speed up boost.serialization by #if 0'ing out per class 
>meta information lookups (versioning etc) but would still be 
>extremely artificial. 

Either way, with or without the embedded flush code, Boost
serialization is less efficient than Ebenezer's Send in both
tests.

Today I timed how long it takes to build the two testcases
mentioned in the original post on Nov. 8th.  I used the date 
command so the numbers are only in seconds. 

              list<int>            list<int> and deque<int>
-----------------------------------------------------------
Boost           42                         61
-----------------------------------------------------------
Ebenezer        12                         20

>>>It would be interesting to see what the results are with a vanilla 
>>>version of your library as well as a feature by feature comparision
to 
>>>see if you really are comparing apples to apples. 
>>> 

>> Both Boost and s11n.net support things like XML that Ebenezer
doesn't. 
>> Boost in my opinion mistakenly tries to support "versioning." We 
>> don't and I don't think s11n does either. 
> 
>Well since I use versioning heavily with boost.serialization this is 
>a must have feature for me. 

What happens if you want to change the type of an existing data
member between releases - say from char to short?  

Brian
www.webEbenezer.net

--=_1e6ef2fcf96d9a3743040e8d704581df--