<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>On Mar 8, 2012, at 2:45 PM, Jacek Furmankiewicz wrote:</div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); position: static; z-index: auto; ">
I am trying to do some research on what is the most performant method for a Twisted server to speak to a client running in a separate process.</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">The default solution in Twisted seems to be Perspective Broker, but then there is AMP and Foolscap as well.</div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)"><br></div><div style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); position: static; z-index: auto; ">
Has anyone ever done any benchmarks comparing those? I'd like to have an idea as to which one is most likely to give me the best performance.</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>AMP is fastest. It's not really possible to <i>directly</i> compare, because PB and Foolscap respectively have more features, but compare here:</div><div><br></div><div><a href="http://speed.twistedmatrix.com/timeline/?exe=2%2C4&base=none&ben=pb&env=d3&revs=200">http://speed.twistedmatrix.com/timeline/?exe=2%2C4&base=none&ben=pb&env=d3&revs=200</a></div><div><br></div><div>and</div><div><br></div><div><a href="http://speed.twistedmatrix.com/timeline/?exe=2%2C4&base=none&ben=amp&env=d3&revs=200">http://speed.twistedmatrix.com/timeline/?exe=2%2C4&base=none&ben=amp&env=d3&revs=200</a></div><div><br></div><div>You're of course welcome to contribute optimizations to PB :).</div><div><br></div><div>-glyph</div><div><br></div></div></body></html>