Quote:
Originally Posted by virtuald
I haven't really benchmarked either of them recently, sounds like something someone could do.
|
Of course I was curious, so I had to write something.
I added a
benchmark script to the pynetworktables samples, it should be pretty trivial for someone to port it over to Java/C++ et al.
In it's default configuration, I got around ~19hz running on localhost. I expect that my methodology isn't perfect, but that number is around what I would expect, and varying the write flush period also varied the latency.
I would expect a similar test of ntcore in its default configuration to be around 9-10hz. This doesn't reflect an 'actual' performance difference between pynetworktables and ntcore, but rather just a different default value for the update rate (I chose 50ms, they use 100ms).