Skip to main content
The 2024 Developer Survey results are live! See the results

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

3
  • If IPC is really a bottleneck, how about using JNI and running it in the same process? A function call is probably faster than any IPC.
    – Ken
    Commented Dec 11, 2009 at 21:22
  • There are several reasons. JVM stability is probably the most important. The external code needs to be able to load 3rd-party DLLs of varying quality, and I do not want these to be able to take down the JVM when they crash. Not having to build and link against JVM libraries is also a big win.
    – JesperE
    Commented Dec 12, 2009 at 8:44
  • Looking at the protocols, as I've been doing this week, there is no way that named pipes are faster than TCP sockets. Every named pipe read involves sending a read request to the peer. TCP doesn't have that. Data is all buffered at one end so there is no windowing. TCP tries to fill the pipe and has windowing.
    – user207421
    Commented Jun 12, 2023 at 7:37