Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Are We Back to the "Wars" Now ?
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2024 06:37:06 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <vhp8qi$12m83$2@dont-email.me>
References: <Sp-cnSz8UupYQaf6nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@earthlink.com>
	<vhf5ts$16rpr$1@dont-email.me> <vhfjtj$19ijm$1@dont-email.me>
	<vhja6j$23f5e$4@dont-email.me> <vhmm4c$hnbj$1@dont-email.me>
	<vhmn2t$hv8i$3@dont-email.me> <vhnikj$me7m$1@dont-email.me>
	<wwvcyio8m9p.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk> <vhorrb$t48o$1@dont-email.me>
	<vhosra$1171f$1@dont-email.me> <lqalg1F7fi9U2@mid.individual.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2024 07:37:06 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="d0640d653b3828f8761808e02c741927";
	logging-data="1136899"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/I3UQzNyHyJ0chPyWIl4YB"
User-Agent: Pan/0.161 (Chasiv Yar; )
Cancel-Lock: sha1:0reYh61+rQcuuu0MxiWOpjSLaaw=
Bytes: 2355

On 22 Nov 2024 06:09:05 GMT, vallor wrote:

> Doesn't the named pipe connection work through the filesystem code? That
> could add overhead.

No. The only thing that exists in the filesystem is the “special file” 
entry in the directory. Opening that triggers special-case processing in 
the kernel that creates the usual pipe buffering/synchronization 
structures (or links up with existing structures created by some prior 
opening of the same special file, perhaps by a different process), not 
dependent on any filesystem.

I just tried creating a C program to do speed tests on data transfers 
through pipes and socket pairs between processes. I am currently setting 
the counter to 10 gigabytes, and transferring that amount of data (using 
whichever mechanism) only takes a couple of seconds on my system.

So the idea that pipes are somehow not suited to large data transfers is 
patently nonsense.

> Can't use named pipes on just any filesystem -- won't work on NFS for
> example, unless I'm mistaken.

Hard to believe NFS could stuff that up, but there you go ...