The Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) is the most important technical revolution of our lifetime. But the IIoT is sick.
I am part of the RTI services team and we frequently help our users with optimizing performance. To see how we stack up, I recently benchmarked RTI Connext DDS against two open source DDS implementations. You would expect that comparing one DDS implementation with another is easy, but from the length of this blog you can probably guess that this was not the case. To help users navigate some of the common pitfalls when comparing DDS implementations, I decided to write them down in a blog. However, this topic is pretty broad so I’ve focused this blog on latency.
The Object Management Group (OMG) Data Distribution Service (DDS) standard is what is called an "open standard." This means that the standard is publicly available and provides a normative reference to help guarantee consistency, portability and interoperability. An open standard is not the same thing as software that is "open source." Open source software is computer software made available with its source code. Open source software may be shared and modified and distributed, usually under an open source license. The DDS Standard is an open standard and has open source implementations available. For example, OpenDDS is an open source implementation of DDS managed by OCI (Object Computing Inc.). There are many commercial distributions that are available as well, the most popular being RTI's Connext® DDS.
Building out a distributed system infrastructure in today’s emerging Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) landscape can be a daunting task, to say the least. If you are a developer or system architect, you know that there are many tools and protocols available to use to move data around in your distributed application. Not to mention the possibility of building out your own custom solution directly on TCP or UDP sockets. Wouldn’t it be great if a lot of the work that needed to be done before you could make a decision on your next infrastructure was already done for you?
Choices, choices, choices. We know you have many when it comes to your communications, messaging and integration platforms. A little over a year ago, someone asked a great question on StackOverflow: why would anyone use DDS over ZeroMQ?. In their words, "it seems that there is no benefit [to] using DDS instead of ZeroMQ.”
Authors: Bob Leigh & Brett Murphy
There was a great article in the NY Times recently that suggested self-driving cars may need some standards to foster innovation. This is certainly true, but the article confuses standards and standardization, suggesting that standardizing on a common automotive platform may instead stifle innovation. It is important to understand the difference between the decision to ‘standardize’ on a platform, and the very powerful impact an interoperability standard can have on an industry.