thrift-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bahadır Doğan <abahadirdo...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Unix Domain Sockets as the transportation layer
Date Wed, 04 Aug 2010 19:35:40 GMT
Thanks!

On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 10:18 PM, Bryan Duxbury <bryan@rapleaf.com> wrote:

> The explanation I got when I looked into it before is that the localhost
> portion of the TCP stack has been crazy optimized, so it's basically no
> worse than domain sockets.
>
> 2010/8/4 Bahadır Doğan <abahadirdogan@gmail.com>
>
> > I didn't perform a performance test to see which one is faster. But I do
> > not
> > understand why domain sockets are not faster. It doesn't enter the
> > networking stack, so it should be faster?
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 9:24 PM, Rush Manbert <rush@manbert.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I certainly agree on that. There's no performance improvement.
> > >
> > > - Rush
> > >
> > > On Aug 4, 2010, at 11:03 AM, Bryan Duxbury wrote:
> > >
> > > > I apologize for being ambiguous in my prior email. I meant to say
> that
> > > unix
> > > > sockets are no *faster* than TCP sockets. You are correct that there
> > are
> > > > other benefits. I'd certainly accept patches for domain sockets if
> they
> > > were
> > > > well done.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 10:51 AM, Rush Manbert <rush@manbert.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I don't want to start a debate, but I beg to differ. Unix domain
> > sockets
> > > >> have a couple of nice features:
> > > >> 1) They don't offer any way for an outsider to access your service,
> > > which
> > > >> is possible if you make a mistake using TCP sockets. The domain
> > sockets
> > > >> don't offer an attack point for a hacker.
> > > >> 2) There are no port numbers to deal with, which just makes things
> > > simpler.
> > > >>
> > > >> My Thrift-in-Windows patch (
> > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-591) adds an Asio
> > > >> implementation that works for both *nix and Windows (C++ only) and
> > adds
> > > Unix
> > > >> Domain Socket support. Caveat emptor, of course, but we're using it
> in
> > > >> production on Mac OS X and Windows so that local applications can
> talk
> > > to a
> > > >> daemon running as a service.
> > > >>
> > > >> - Rush
> > > >>
> > > >> On Aug 4, 2010, at 10:04 AM, Bryan Duxbury wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> I thought the same thing and did some exploration. Ultimately,
I
> > > >> determined
> > > >>> that domain sockets are no better than TCP sockets, even against
> > > >> localhost.
> > > >>> I recommend you just use TCP.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> -Bryan
> > > >>>
> > > >>> 2010/8/4 Bahadır Doğan <abahadirdogan@gmail.com>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> Hello
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Is there any attempt to use Unix Domain Sockets as the
> > transportation
> > > >> layer
> > > >>>> with Thrift?
> > > >>>> Isn't it nice to make server and client applications in the
same
> > > machine
> > > >>>> talking with Thrift? Or am I wrong?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Thanks.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message