thrift-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mos Yud <>
Subject Re: recommendation for transport layer to use for windows localhost rpc
Date Wed, 21 Jun 2017 06:23:58 GMT

Thanks for you reply.
>From your experience, do you know what thrift transport type is usually
used for windows ipc?


On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 8:47 AM, Randy Abernethy <> wrote:

> Hey Moshe,
> Couple of thoughts.
> First Apache Thrift is open source so you can always improve the NamedPipes
> Transport impl to meet your needs and submit a patch to get the changes
> into the trunk.Nothing faster on Windows than an IOCompletion port based
> server using pipes in my experience, alas there are no IO Completion port
> servers in tree. There was an IO Completion port server in Java submitted
> once upon a time but never committed. If you build a good one we would of
> course accept the patch for that as well.
> Second there are also good reasons to consider sockets. Using Sockets you
> can talk to anything anywhere, Microsoft has a very fast TCP/IP stack also
> and if you use localhost (rather than a real interface) things take the
> fast path in the Windows Executive. I haven't done any tests lately but you
> might find sockets and localhost competitive with native options for local
> IPC while leaving you with a more open solution.
> Would love to hear which way you go and what you find out along the way.
> Best,
> Randy
> (typing from Netanya)
> On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 9:35 PM, Mos Yud <> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I would like to use thrift rpc (on local host) for windows, and i need
> some
> > recommendation for the transport layer to use.
> > One of the mandatory requirements is rpc timeout which is supported only
> by
> > TSocket and unfortunately isn't supported by TPipe.
> > On the other hand, using sockets for ipc is less efficient/error prone
> then
> > using pipes (i.e. firewall rule that blocks the connection accidentally
> or
> > as a result of some error).
> >
> > Do you have any recommendation for this issue?
> >
> > Thx,
> > Moshe.
> >

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