Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

How different messaging semantics can affect SCA applications performances: a benchmark comparison

  • Published:
Analog Integrated Circuits and Signal Processing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Software Communications Architecture (SCA) compliant radios typically contain a large number of software components. Some software components provide access to hardware devices while others perform signal processing. By interacting with each other, the software components implement a radio communications standard. To interact, the software components use a middleware called Common Object Request Broker Architecture (CORBA). Using CORBA, each interaction is carried out as an exchange of messages between two components. CORBA supports two main types of messaging: one-way and two-way. This article explores the differences between the two types of messaging and provides performance metrics. The article also describes design approaches that can be used to avoid common pitfalls associated with the use of both types of messaging.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Object Management Group. Common Object Request Broker Architecture: Core Specification, version 3.0.3, formal/04-03-01, March 2004.

  2. Objective Interface Systems Inc. CORBA Programming using ORBexpress RT for C++, version 2.6, April 2006.

  3. Vinoski, S. (1998). New features for CORBA 3.0. Communications of the ACM, 41, 44–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. INTEGRITY Kernel Reference Guide, June 2006.

  5. Software Communications Architecture Specification, Version 2.2.2., December 2006.

  6. Lévesque, F. & Bernier, S. (2007). Interconnection SCA applications: SDR,07 Technical Conference 2007, Denver.

  7. Object Management Group, CORBA 3.0—OMG IDL Syntax and Semantics chapter formal/02-06-39, June 2002.

  8. Bernier, S., Auger, C., Zamora Zapata, J. P., Latour, H., & Michaud-Rancourt M. (2009). SCA advanced features—Optimizing boot time, memory usage, and middleware communications: SDRF’09 Technical Conference, Washington.

  9. Henning, M., & Vinoski, S. (1999). Advanced CORBA programming with C++. Boston: Addison Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Zhang, Y., Ootsu, K., Yokota, T., & Baba, T. (2009). Clustered communication for efficient pipelined multithreading on commodity MCPs. IAENG International Journal of Computer Science, 36(4), 275–283.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Communications Research Centre Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada

    Steve Bernier, Hugues Latour & Juan Pablo Zamora Zapata

Authors
  1. Steve Bernier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hugues Latour
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Juan Pablo Zamora Zapata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Juan Pablo Zamora Zapata.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bernier, S., Latour, H. & Zamora Zapata, J.P. How different messaging semantics can affect SCA applications performances: a benchmark comparison. Analog Integr Circ Sig Process 69, 227–243 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10470-011-9700-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10470-011-9700-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation