Fast DDS vs Cyclone DDS

Software
1

I noticed that Fast DDS used to be recommended by Zed (e.g. Bad performance of Zed X in ROS2 on AGX Orin 32 )

However, now Cyclone DDS is recommended in the official docs. Is there any reason this recommendation was changed?

I also wonder if anyone has successfully gotten Fast DDS to work. It segfaults no matter what I do. I’m running in Docker with the following Dockerfile: Improved Jazzy support and documentation · Issue #409 · stereolabs/zed-ros2-wrapper · GitHub

It sounds like Fast DDS is generally faster than Cyclone DDS from the comparisons I’ve found, which is why I’m curious if it’s possible to run with it and why it’s no longer recommended.

2

Hi @benmccann

That’s an old post. We recommend using Cyclone DDS with the settings described in this documentation page:

Cyclone DDS performs better with big messages using the recommended tuning.

Normally, you can use FastDDS or Cyclone DDS indifferently, according to your specific requirements.

3

Thanks. I was just curious if you ran some internal benchmarks or there was something else that drove the change

4

We performed tests that confirmed the change, but we do not have numbers to share publicly.