I assume you meant to say 'inproc' would be blazing fast compared to 'ipc'?
What message size(s) have you tried? I'm not convinced this is a reasonable expectation, particularly with smallish messages. IPC transport is going to involve a few more kernel calls but at the end of the day, it's still memory -> memory, and the improc socket type still has most of the zmq socket machinery to traverse. Tom. On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 4:34 PM Marlborough, Rick <[email protected]> wrote: > Designation: Non-Export Controlled Content > > Folks; > > We are testing message delivery between 2 zmq sockets. We have done > testing over the network between 2 nodes, on a single node and within a > single process. For the single process case we use inproc transport. When > we examine the delivery times we find that single node ipc transport is > better than network. Surprisingly, inproc transport performance is > virtually indistinguishable from ipc transport. I would expect ipc to be > blazing fast in comparison. For the record we are using ZeroMQ 4.2.2 on red > hat 7 64 bit. What should I expect using ipc transport? > > > > Thanx > > Rick > > 3.1.1001 > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
_______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
