Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!news.stack.nl!.POSTED!ipv6.urchin.earth.li!twic From: Tom Anderson Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Low-latency alternative to Java Object Serialization Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 19:15:58 +0100 Organization: Stack Usenet News Service Lines: 26 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: ipv6.urchin.earth.li Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Trace: mud.stack.nl 1317665758 40531 2001:ba8:0:1b4::6 (3 Oct 2011 18:15:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@stack.nl NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 18:15:58 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23) In-Reply-To: Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:8496 On Sat, 1 Oct 2011, Giovanni Azua wrote: > I was wondering if anyone can recommend a Serialization framework that > would outperform the vanilla Java default Serialization? Swords not words: https://github.com/eishay/jvm-serializers/wiki/ I sent them a patch to add JBoss Serialization a while ago, but they haven't taken it. I should try again now the project is on GitHub. > I remember JBoss Middleware implementation having some Serialization > framework for this very same reason ... have to check that too. It's pretty good. More or less plug-compatible with JDK serialization at the API level (as in, it doesn't need schema generation or weird interfaces or anything), and much faster. From what i remember of my benchmarks, it was faster than any of the textual formats, and only a bit slower than the schema-based binary formats like Protocol Buffers. tom -- Now I am thoroughly confused. -- Colin Brace sums up RT3090 support in Linux