Re: [g-a-devel] [Accessibility] Re: [Kde-accessibility] [Accessibility-atspi] D-Bus AT-SPI - The way forward

[Rob Taylor <rob taylor codethink co uk>]

George Kraft wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-12-09 at 14:44 +0100, Olaf Schmidt wrote:
>> We quickly found that it is possible to simply reuse the existing 
>> authentification methods used by CORBA. 
> 
> Would it make sense to get performance numbers for local and networked
> AT-SPI over Orbit2 versus D-Bus?    Does setting $HOME/.xorbitrc change
> the local performance results for Orbit2?  I run with these settings all
> the time.
> 
> ORBIIOPIPv4=1
> ORBLocalOnly=1
> 

In case you missed Mark Doffman's earlier mail, I'll quote it here:

> I was running without an .orbitrc file, so the standard properties in
> the code were used. The standard setup is to use unix sockets
> (ORBIIOPUsock=1). Adding the configuration above, and disabling USock
> caused worse performance. (Approx 10% slowdown). Simply adding the lines
> above without disabling USock didn't make much of a difference. 

i.e. an orbitrc of

OBITIIOPIPv4=1
ORBLocalOnly=1

is roughly 10% slower than

ORBITIIOPUsock=1

(on a linux system, in this case)

We could test DBus over tcp (non-local) against ORBit over TCP
(non-local), though I'm not sure how common a use-case this is.

I'd expect that the numbers would get more similar between the dbus and
orbit versus using unix sockets, as the time spent in transport would
come to dominate. Message sizes are roughly similar between the two
technologies and almost always would be under MTU.

Thanks,
Rob

-- 
Rob Taylor, Codethink Ltd. -  http://codethink.co.uk