Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!cs.umn.edu!uc!apctrc!voyager!hgo7!zfgo01 From: zfgo01@hgo7.hou.amoco.com (F. G. Oakes) Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals Subject: Re: Regular pipe vs. Named Pipe Message-ID: Date: 8 Jun 91 23:22:17 GMT References: <1991Jun7.195953.27744@digi.lonestar.org> Sender: news@hou.amoco.com Organization: Amoco Lines: 32 cfoughty@digi.lonestar.org (Cy Foughty) writes: > What are the differences between a regular pipe and a > named pipe? > Which type of pipe is faster and by how much? > Which is faster, a named pipe or a message queue? > Does a named pipe always go to disk or only when the allocated > memory is exhausted? > Finally, please send me any additional comments, hints, or > suggestions concerning Interprocess Communications. I been > using ALL the different IPC mechanisms for years but there > are a few lingering questions. I don't mean to offend, but I think some of this would be obvious if you RTM. As to which is faster--depends on your CPU, the version of UNIX you're using, etc. There are a number of good references on the design, structure, and internals of the UNIX operating system that describe this very well. I'd recommend them as supplemental reading--not light, but enlightening. As far as IPC, I've found the docmentation, included with the operating system (SVR5.3.X and SVR4.0) to adequate for me. -- ============================================================================ zfgo01@hgo7.hou.amoco.com (Glen Oakes)