似乎每个人都说命名管道比套接字 IPC 更快。它们的速度有多快？我更喜欢使用套接字，因为它们可以进行双向通信并且非常灵活，但如果数量很大，我会选择速度而不是灵 active 。
最佳答案
使用 共享内存 解决方案可获得最佳效果。
命名管道仅比 TCP 套接字好 16%。
通过 IPC benchmarking 获得结果:
- 系统:Linux(Linux ubuntu 4.4.0 x86_64 i7-6700K 4.00GHz)
- 消息:128 字节
- 消息数:1000000
管道基准:
Message size: 128
Message count: 1000000
Total duration: 27367.454 ms
Average duration: 27.319 us
Minimum duration: 5.888 us
Maximum duration: 15763.712 us
Standard deviation: 26.664 us
Message rate: 36539 msg/s
FIFO(命名管道)基准测试:
Message size: 128
Message count: 1000000
Total duration: 38100.093 ms
Average duration: 38.025 us
Minimum duration: 6.656 us
Maximum duration: 27415.040 us
Standard deviation: 91.614 us
Message rate: 26246 msg/s
消息队列基准测试:
Message size: 128
Message count: 1000000
Total duration: 14723.159 ms
Average duration: 14.675 us
Minimum duration: 3.840 us
Maximum duration: 17437.184 us
Standard deviation: 53.615 us
Message rate: 67920 msg/s
共享内存基准测试:
Message size: 128
Message count: 1000000
Total duration: 261.650 ms
Average duration: 0.238 us
Minimum duration: 0.000 us
Maximum duration: 10092.032 us
Standard deviation: 22.095 us
Message rate: 3821893 msg/s
TCP 套接字基准测试:
Message size: 128
Message count: 1000000
Total duration: 44477.257 ms
Average duration: 44.391 us
Minimum duration: 11.520 us
Maximum duration: 15863.296 us
Standard deviation: 44.905 us
Message rate: 22483 msg/s
Unix 域套接字基准测试:
Message size: 128
Message count: 1000000
Total duration: 24579.846 ms
Average duration: 24.531 us
Minimum duration: 2.560 us
Maximum duration: 15932.928 us
Standard deviation: 37.854 us
Message rate: 40683 msg/s
ZeroMQ 基准测试:
Message size: 128
Message count: 1000000
Total duration: 64872.327 ms
Average duration: 64.808 us
Minimum duration: 23.552 us
Maximum duration: 16443.392 us
Standard deviation: 133.483 us
Message rate: 15414 msg/s
关于linux - 工控机性能: Named Pipe vs Socket，我们在Stack Overflow上找到一个类似的问题： https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1235958/