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 <mos....@gmail.com> 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. >
