Doubt regarding SDF

I had the used SDC from the post routed design and the same SDC was used to for writing the SDC in ETS and found no difference. But according to my understanding because of the SPEF inclusion in ETS there should be a delay change in atleast the interconnects. I not sure if the procedure followed is correct. Please share more info on the same. 

Selvam, there are some timing settings that are different between EDI and ETS, so that may explain some small differences in the two SDF files.

Kienu, I'm not sure if you're mising acronyms here - meaning SDF instead of SDC - we'd need more info on the two scenarios you're trying to compare. 

 Hi Kari,

What i actually wanted to ask is, I wrote out  SDF and SPEF using the encounter tool for a routed design. I then invoked this same SPEF in ETS, performed the SPEF flow and wrote out another SDF in ETS. I compared the SDF written from EDI and ETS and found no difference, but according to my understanding the Parastic data inclusion should have made some delay difference. Shouldn't there have been a difference in the two SDF's?

Thanks kari, But I have one doubt regarding this.

I've used same max,min and typical lib for both encounter and ETS. So delay for each standard cells same in both encounter and ETS. Then Why we go for ETS to write sdf and timing optimization?  If I'm wrong,correct me.

Thanks,

selvam.

what do you mean by "performed the spef flow"?

from what you've said, you had a design in EDI and wrote out SDF and SPEF. So that design already had SPEF information. Then wrote out that SPEF, read it in to ETS, and output SDF. It makes sense they would match, if they were both based on the same SPEF. 

Thanks for the reply.