Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #8448

Re: Low-latency alternative to Java Object Serialization

Show all headers | View raw

On 10/1/2011 5:46 AM, Giovanni Azua wrote:
> Three years ago I worked for a "high frequency trading" company and they
> avoided default Java Serialization like "the devil to the cross"


Just because "avoid serialization" was a requirement for your previous 
work, doesn't mean that it should be a requirement for every project 
after that.

Frequently, the low-developer cost of Java serialization overrides all 
other concerns.  The increase in CPU costs and network bandwidth it 
requires is very cheap.  DO NOT work around Java serialization unless 
you are sure you need to.  I.e., after careful analysis (and profiling) 
of a working app or prototype.

If you do need to work around Java serialization, look at 
Externalizable interface.

http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/Programming/serialization/

Note the sections on "gotchas" in that article.  Esp. both the caching 
and the performance considerations.

Totally rolling your own protocol is possible too if you need the utmost 
performance.  'Tain't hard.  'Tain't easy either.  Data IO Streams are a 
good compromise between higher level serialization and raw sockets.

<http://download.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/io/DataOutputStream.html>

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Low-latency alternative to Java Object Serialization Giovanni Azua <bravegag@hotmail.com> - 2011-10-01 14:46 +0200
  Re: Low-latency alternative to Java Object Serialization Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-10-01 09:19 -0700
    Re: Low-latency alternative to Java Object Serialization Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-10-01 21:13 +0200
      Re: Low-latency alternative to Java Object Serialization jebblue <n@n.nnn> - 2011-10-01 14:35 -0500
        Re: Low-latency alternative to Java Object Serialization Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-10-02 11:07 +0200
        Re: Low-latency alternative to Java Object Serialization Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-10-03 11:43 -0700
    Re: Low-latency alternative to Java Object Serialization Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-10-03 19:24 +0100
      Re: Low-latency alternative to Java Object Serialization Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-10-04 02:45 -0700
      Re: Low-latency alternative to Java Object Serialization Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-10-04 08:55 -0700
  Re: Low-latency alternative to Java Object Serialization markspace <-@.> - 2011-10-01 09:48 -0700
    Re: Low-latency alternative to Java Object Serialization Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-10-04 02:51 -0700
  Re: Low-latency alternative to Java Object Serialization Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-10-02 11:10 +0200
  Re: Low-latency alternative to Java Object Serialization Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-10-03 19:15 +0100
  Re: Low-latency alternative to Java Object Serialization Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-10-02 11:50 +0000

csiph-web