Re: [linux-audio-dev] FIFOs vs. sockets

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] FIFOs vs. sockets
From: jaromil (jaromil_AT_dyne.org)
Date: Sun Jun 01 2003 - 11:03:20 EEST


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 02:59:25PM -0600, Hans Fugal wrote:
> On linux, which is faster, pipe, FIFO, or socket? What about shared
> memory - is it faster, and if so is it faster enough to warrant the
> extra programming overhead?

FIFO pipes are a good choice.

i use them in a multithreaded environment, accessed by different threads
asynchronously, both in blocking/nonblocking modes, for read/write
operations; concurrent memory access is avoided using simple mutexes.

i did a small C++ class out of that, working on a codebase written by
Charles Samuels a while ago. My modifications on the original code
emphatize on speed and stability. Right now is very well debugged.

it is GNU GPL and you'll find it in the pipe.cpp and pipe.h files of
MuSE Streamer http://muse.dyne.org

ciao

- --
 jaromil, dyne.org unix programmer, http://korova.dyne.org
 < spring unveils cryptosexual anarchism in random forms >
   
 dyne:bolic liveCD http://dynebolic.org | dyne.org productions
 MuSE Streamer v0.8.1 http://muse.dyne.org | fugbachgasse 12 / 18
 FreeJ v0.5 http://freej.org | 1020 Vienna, AUSTRIA
 FARAH in Palestine http://farah.dyne.org | tel: +43 1 92 56 318

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+2bNIWLCC1ltubZcRAsEZAJ9HKaauMKJ5YlGcENFpCRuYkMDqFgCeJRIh
uMVxQIeM/5SIGFvF2ou++Wo=
=DxI4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sun Jun 01 2003 - 11:13:27 EEST