Timeline for Performance of sockets vs pipes
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 12, 2023 at 10:39 | comment | added | user207421 |
Hard to believe. In named pipes every read and every write is preceded by a read or write request packet, which can only add latency. That's why TransactNamedPipe() exists. Furthermore there is no windowing and no attempt to fill the pipe.
|
|
| Jan 31, 2010 at 4:40 | comment | added | pestilence669 | @leeks-and-leaks Correct. I might was probably inebriated when I typed this out | |
| Jan 31, 2010 at 2:01 | comment | added | Leeks and Leaks | By bandwidth I think you mean throughput. | |
| Dec 12, 2009 at 8:45 | vote | accept | JesperE | ||
| Dec 11, 2009 at 23:09 | comment | added | pestilence669 | Named pipes & UDSs have less latency, more bandwidth and less CPU overhead than a TCP socket... pretty much always. If you're really wanting the fastest Windows IPC, however, memory mapped files reign supreme. | |
| Dec 11, 2009 at 17:44 | comment | added | JesperE | BTW: what about latency vs. bandwidth. The communication pattern is usually lots of small messages sent back and forth, so low latency is probably more important than high bandwidth. | |
| Dec 11, 2009 at 17:43 | comment | added | JesperE | Thanks. You don't happen to have (or know) or any benchmarks? | |
| Dec 10, 2009 at 22:36 | comment | added | pestilence669 | Yeah, I wasn't very clear. I steered clear of mentioning Apple's named "socket," but still managed to make it confusing. :) | |
| Dec 10, 2009 at 19:45 | comment | added | Ken | Oh, just realized you might have meant that either is acceptable, and only "local pipe" is a synonym for "named pipe". I've never heard that (this page is now #3 on google for "linux local pipe"!). | |
| Dec 10, 2009 at 19:43 | comment | added | Ken | I'm pretty sure a Unix Domain Socket is different from a named pipe (which do exist on Linux and probably every modern UNIX). | |
| Dec 10, 2009 at 18:59 | history | answered | pestilence669 | CC BY-SA 2.5 |