3

i know this question maybe seems duplicate, but i think the new versions of RPC frameworks better to compare again, after all i m a newbie in RPC and HLA

my requirements:

  1. Real-time pub/sub messaging architecture, i have 12 nodes connect each other and i want each process of my application run multiple times in different VM servers on each node

  2. each process must know about its replicated process too, if memory in one VM goes up a replicated process must help this process in parallel

  3. log of error occurred for each one of processes for tracing problem, and number of lost messages

  4. i need supporting RTI and HLA for my simulation objects

  5. why DDS is more used for critical systems like Military or Air Traffic management? is opensplice dds is that much good or OMG supported and created by military and DARPA guys too :D ?

do these frameworks provide such an options (for DDS opensource dds based on TAO ACE)?

what is my another options (like thrift)?

good compare of these frameworks? thanks a lot.

danics
  • 323
  • 1
  • 9
  • 1
    What is the bandwidth of your system? DDS requires a lot of bandwidth. Using the term RTI can be confusing - there is the HLA RTI and RTI Connext which supplies DDS. Do you want a comparison of different DDS frameworks or DDS and HLA? Have you considered DIS? – cup Nov 10 '14 at 13:29
  • 1
    Please note that usually software recommendation is off topic. – didierc Nov 10 '14 at 13:30
  • 2
    @cup i mean HLA RTI support i don't want any compare, just use this standard for supporting simulator standards, and about DIS i consider that too but i was confused about using that cause it was a standard older than HLA – danics Nov 10 '14 at 13:34
  • 1
    @didierc i dont think this is a software recommendation, this is just comparing functionality of two or three SDK's – danics Nov 10 '14 at 13:35
  • 1
    @cup my needed bandwidth is maximum 1Mbit per second – danics Nov 10 '14 at 13:41
  • 1
    ZeroC ICE handles middleware requirements including pub/sub communication. It is open-source so if you will have latency or throughput issues you should be able to handle that: code is very good quality - at least pieces I've been through. As for usage of certain system by military or air traffic management as good indication of product quality: US navy were using Windows - have you read about USS Yorktown? – lowtech Nov 10 '14 at 16:32
  • 1
    @lowtech no i didn't read about USS Yorktown, if you have any knowledge about strength and weakness of zeroc or DDS please share. i m confused and i don't know which one is better i look at the codes and you are right very beautiful code but has it a realtime performance too? thanks in advance – danics Nov 11 '14 at 06:00
  • 1
    When you ask about ZeroC ICE, why not also look at CORBA, especially the new IDL to C++11 language mapping made CORBA very easy. – Johnny Willemsen Nov 11 '14 at 07:30
  • 1
    @JohnnyWillemsen, what you mean When i ask about ZeroC ICE!!!, why you don't compare CORBA with openDDS?, i thought all of this open sources are using an architecture like CoRBA but CORBA is old and now we better use new Implementations? what is difference between openDDS and CORBA? you just confused me more :D – danics Nov 11 '14 at 08:03
  • 1
    @JohnnyWillemsen , please for more clearance, can you tell openDDS can implement all of i want in my question or not? plus my questions in previous comment too :D, thanks a lot – danics Nov 11 '14 at 08:15
  • 1
    @danics DDS is a very powerful pub/sub data centric standard. I would recommend you to look at RTI DDS instead, that is the leading DDS implementation, they have a free-of-charge community edition and also provide excellent commercial versions and support. – Johnny Willemsen Nov 11 '14 at 08:50
  • 2
    @danics CORBA and DDS are two different OMG standards. For both there are multiple implementations, OpenDDS is a DDS implementation, not a CORBA implementation. In the subject of the question you mentioned ZeroC ICE, that is why I mentioned also CORBA. – Johnny Willemsen Nov 11 '14 at 09:06
  • 1
    @JohnnyWillemsen, sorry if this discussion turn to chat and if you do'nt like it, but for last question you think ZeroC ICE implemented as a CORBA standard or DDS standard? i mean it has IDL like language for Object and data but it has IceStorm for message/queue implementations with supporting pub/sub – danics Nov 11 '14 at 10:01
  • 1
    @danics ZeroC could do both, but it is from one source with one supplier, CORBA and DDS are both open standards with multiple implementations from various sources – Johnny Willemsen Nov 11 '14 at 10:17
  • 1
    Are you thinking of using DDS instead of an RTI for HLA? – cup Nov 11 '14 at 12:55
  • 1
    @cup no i want to create a software using ZeroC Ice or openDDS with supporting of RTI serialization and can connect to a RTI engine like certi or portico. you think witch is better ZeroC ICE or openDDS? – danics Nov 11 '14 at 13:04
  • 1
    I have no experience of ZeroC ICE so I can't comment on that. Do you really need to use DDS? HLA will work across the network so is there a need for DDS? The only difference is that HLA needs an RTI server and DDS doesn't. That is unless you are taking it off one network and putting it on to a different one. Also consider the free version of Pitch RTI - it supports HLA1516-2010, including multiple FOMs. When I last used it, Portico only supported HLA1.3. – cup Nov 12 '14 at 05:57
  • 1
    @cup thanks for your suggestion, i have so many different messages between my processes so i need a MQ SDK, but for that parts of my application connect to simulators i want to add HLA supporting, i don't think it was a smart way for implement all stuff in HLA, thanks for your suggestion but pitch is'nt opensource but good for learning thanks again – danics Nov 12 '14 at 09:03

0 Answers0