Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!usenet.ukfsn.org!not-for-mail From: Martin Gregorie Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Low-latency alternative to Java Object Serialization Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 11:50:32 +0000 (UTC) Organization: UK Free Software Network Lines: 20 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 84.45.235.129 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: localhost.localdomain 1317556232 28119 84.45.235.129 (2 Oct 2011 11:50:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@localhost.localdomain NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 11:50:32 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Pan/0.135 (Tomorrow I'll Wake Up and Scald Myself with Tea; GIT 30dc37b master) Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:8698 On Sat, 01 Oct 2011 14:46:55 +0200, 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" this is > a Spanish idiom btw ... :) due to its latency. > If low latency and low overheads on transmitted messages are major considerations, but you want to use a standard format, then direct human readability (i.e. by inspection rather than by automated decoding into a human-readable format) may become somewhat lower priority. In this situation its well worth considering ASN.1, which is widely used within telcos for inter-process communication. The Apache Foundation has a Java package that handles ASN.1 encoding and decoding. -- martin@ | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org |