[nanomsg] Re: DDS vs nanomsg
- From: George Walker <georgewalkeriv@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: "nanomsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <nanomsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 18:34:50 -0500
I'm no authority on this topic, but it's come up at work. Folks, please
correct me where I'm wrong:
1: DDS has more features: it knows about data types (like protobufs or
msgpack) and has a discovery service for "topics." No real separation of
concerns here, it tries to solve a lot of problems. Nanomsg is more
narrowly focused on scalable comms patterns for intra and inter process
communications, locally or on the network.
2: DDS has a couple of implementations, but I've read complaints about the
quality of the free ones. I seem to recall the foss one was copyleft.
3: nanomsg has many more language bindings than DDS, and two high quality
foss implementations that I'm aware of.
4: DDS has a lot of field experience (DoD) on big expensive boats etc.
5: DDS came from the people who brought us CORBA.
George
On Thursday, January 22, 2015, Rohit Saboo <saboo.rohit@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi nanomsg community,
>
> Is there an article discussing all the pros and cons of dds vs nanomsg vs
> other mechanisms? If not, can someone here offer some tips about when is
> nanomsg better than the others (esp dds) and when it is not?
>
> Thanks,
> Rohit
>
Other related posts:
