Re: [Boost-users] [serialization] platform independence (32 & 64bitwindows)

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [serialization] platform independence (32 & 64bitwindows)
From: Francois Mauger (mauger_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-07-17 15:47:39

Hi ??????,

We have used eos portable archives for years for the storage of 
terabytes of experimental and simulation physics data with floats, 
doubles (including NaNs and non finite values) and of course signed and 
unsigned integers of various sizes, both on 32bits and 64bits archs on 
various kind of machines (many Linux flavors and a few MacOS X). AFAIK, 
eos version 5.0 works with Boost 1.49 but it works prefectly for us with 
Boost 1.53 (I suspect it is ok for 1.5X too).

In conclusion I strongly recommend to use eos stuff. Should this bunch 
of classes fail to work with some future versions of Boost, I'm pretty 
sure that some people (at least Christian Pfligersdorffer the author or 
I modestly) would do the best to provide fixes.

best regards

frc
--
 >>On 17/07/2013 20:36, Robert Ramey wrote:
> ???? ?????? wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> We are using boost serialization our product which was 32bit only till
>> now.  Now we have started building it on 64bit as well.  On finding
>> that boost::binary_archive is not platform independent, we seem to
>> have 2 options:
>>
>>      1. Use text_archive - (but are worried about performance since the
>> serialized data is approx 500MB even after gzip compression)
>>
>>      2. Use the eos portable archive - (but it is updated only till
>> boost 1.49.  We are using 1.53)
>>
>> So my questions are:
>>
>>      1. One (and only one) of our archives created by our 32 bit
>> executable is successfully read in by the 64 bit executable while the
>> rest throw exception on reading the archive signature.  If the
>> platform is encoded in the signature, why is that one archive being
>> read in successfully.
>
> I couldn't say - maybe you just got lucky.
>
>>
>>      2.  Which of the above two approaches would be better
>
> If performance is an issue, I would try them both.  It shouldn't be too
> tough to run a test.
>
>> and why.
>
> Hmmm - It's hard for me to know which would be better.  Note that
> the portable binary archive doesn't support floating point values
>
>
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>>Adresse/address:
   Laboratoire de Physique Corpusculaire de Caen (UMR 6534)
   ENSICAEN
   6, Boulevard du Marechal Juin
   14050 CAEN Cedex
   FRANCE
Courriel/e-mail: mauger_at_[hidden]
Tél./phone:      [phone]
Fax:             02 31 45 25 49 / ([phone]
>> Yours Sincerely
>> Ashish Varman
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Boost-users mailing list
> Boost-users_at_[hidden]
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users
>
-- 
François Mauger
LPC Caen-CNRS/IN2P3-UCBN-ENSICAEN
Département de Physique -- Université de Caen Basse-Normandie