cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
551
Views
2
Helpful
1
Replies

Any performance difference between kickers vs subscribers

kiran kotari
Cisco Employee
Cisco Employee

When I wanted to communicate with IO devices I am confused to use kickers or subscribers. Is there any performance difference between them.

1 Accepted Solution

Accepted Solutions

vleijon
Cisco Employee
Cisco Employee

I would expect a kicker to have slightly better performance, since it is builtin to the system and does not have to communicate over the API.

Generally, you can think something like this:

If all you care about is triggering an action (such as re-deploy), then a kicker is generally the right answer.

If you want to perform some other procedure (say that you want to copy some data around, send a notification or similiar) then a subscriber makes more sense.


When using a kicker, almost all the logic is in the triggered action, but when using a subscriber you can have more logic in the subscriber itself.

View solution in original post

1 Reply 1

vleijon
Cisco Employee
Cisco Employee

I would expect a kicker to have slightly better performance, since it is builtin to the system and does not have to communicate over the API.

Generally, you can think something like this:

If all you care about is triggering an action (such as re-deploy), then a kicker is generally the right answer.

If you want to perform some other procedure (say that you want to copy some data around, send a notification or similiar) then a subscriber makes more sense.


When using a kicker, almost all the logic is in the triggered action, but when using a subscriber you can have more logic in the subscriber itself.