How reliable are named pipes?
in [Unix Programming]
|
From: Peter Olcott on 8 Apr 2010 12:58 Are there any reliability issues or other caveats with using named pipes?
From: Ian Collins on 8 Apr 2010 18:04 On 04/ 9/10 04:58 AM, Peter Olcott wrote: > Are there any reliability issues or other caveats with using > named pipes? In what context? [c.p.t. removed again] -- Ian Collins
From: Peter Olcott on 8 Apr 2010 19:12 "Ian Collins" <ian-news(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:82726lFp8jU7(a)mid.individual.net... > On 04/ 9/10 04:58 AM, Peter Olcott wrote: >> Are there any reliability issues or other caveats with >> using >> named pipes? > > In what context? > > [c.p.t. removed again] > > -- > Ian Collins One respondent in another group said that named pipes are inherently very unreliable and I think that he switched to some sort of sockets. In any case he did not choose named pipes for his IPC because of significant reliability issues that he encountered.
From: Chris Friesen on 8 Apr 2010 19:14 On 04/08/2010 10:58 AM, Peter Olcott wrote: > Are there any reliability issues or other caveats with using > named pipes? They work exactly as described. Chris
From: Peter Olcott on 8 Apr 2010 19:22
"Chris Friesen" <cbf123(a)mail.usask.ca> wrote in message news:lsOdnZNAxutl_iPWnZ2dnUVZ_ugAAAAA(a)posted.sasktel... > On 04/08/2010 10:58 AM, Peter Olcott wrote: >> Are there any reliability issues or other caveats with >> using >> named pipes? > > They work exactly as described. > > Chris The other respondent must have been referring to MS Windows named pipes then, thanks. |