Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 16:14:46 +0100 From: Corinna Vinschen To: cygwin Subject: Re: unix domain socket with shared memory ? Message-ID: <20020207161446.C14241@cygbert.vinschen.de> Mail-Followup-To: cygwin References: <000e01c1af19$013888d0$01000001 AT BRAMSCHE> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <000e01c1af19$013888d0$01000001@BRAMSCHE> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 03:17:27PM +0100, Ralf Habacker wrote: > Some guys may say, unix domain sockets are not implemented through tcp connection, but I'm relative sure, that this > is true: Huh? Why are you "relative" sure? Didn't you take a look into the Cygwin sources which would be the right place to learn how something's implemented? net.cc is a good starting point. I'm a bit surprised by your results, though. Since AF_LOCAL and AF_INET are implemented the same way, they should be nearly equally fast^Wslow. AF_LOCAL just has a bit of an overhead by some additional tests but the naked read() and write() calls should be nearly equivalent. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Developer mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat, Inc. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/