As a matter of fact, we have. On your machine you should run the local_lat/remote_lat and local_thr/remote_thr benchmark programs. You can specify the transport on the command line and measure how fast it is on your box.
On Jan 18, 2014, at 3:48 AM, Goswin von Brederlow <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 03:18:00PM -0600, Charles Remes wrote: >> Right now the IPC transport is build on top of UNIX sockets and does >> not use shared memory. If someone were willing to write and contribute >> the code to use a shared-memory approach, we would love to have it. >> The ?roadmap? for zeromq is whatever the community wants it to be. If >> someone wants to contribute a shared memory implementation for IPC >> then we?ll merge it. No one is paid to work on zeromq full time. >> >> So, aside from a few OS-level optimizations that might be in place, >> IPC is about the same performance as TCP transport. >> >> It would be difficult to say how zeromq performs in comparison to a >> shared memory implementation. Someone would need to write a benchmark >> to compare the two. I am not aware of anyone who has done that. >> >> On Jan 17, 2014, at 2:25 PM, Srinivas Kotamarti >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> I had read the guide, from what I understand the inproc:// transport is for >>> inter thread communication. What I am looking for is for communicating >>> between processes on the same machine. Since shared memory is faster for >>> communication between the processes on the same machine, I was wondering if >>> ZeroMQ has a transport for shared memory. >>> >>> My search on the dev-list couple of discussions regarding the same and a >>> possibility of 'memory mapped' file transport was mentioned in the emails. >>> So does ZeroMQ already have a transport for shared memory or in the plans >>> for future? >>> >>> How does ZeroMQ ipc transport perform compare to a shared memory based >>> communication implementation? >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> --Srinivas >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [email protected] >>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Goswin von >>> Brederlow >>> Sent: Friday, January 17, 2014 5:37 AM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: [zeromq-dev] Newbee Question >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 02:44:20AM +0000, Srinivas Kotamarti wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> I am new to ZeroMQ. I have a bunch of questions !! >>>> >>>> I was wondering if the ZeroMQ has an ipc for shared memory, if not does >>>> anyone know what is the best IPC to use for communication on localhost? >>>> >>>> Is the ipc transport a unix domain socket? >>>> >>>> How does ZeroMQ ipc transport perform compare to a shared memory based >>>> communication implementation? >>>> >>>> Answers are greatly appreciated ! >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> --Srinivas >>> >>> Read the guide and look for inproc://. >>> >>> MfG >>> Goswin > > Implementation wise wouldn't that be just like inproc://, a simple > ypipe, except that the ypipe needs to be allocated in the shared > memory and messages and payload must be allocated there too or copied? > > So how much faster is inproc over tcp? Has anyone benchmarked that? > > MfG > Goswin > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
_______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
