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 <[email protected]> > >> 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. >>
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
