From owner-freebsd-questions Fri Oct 25 3:54: 3 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC65037B401 for ; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 03:54:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from witchspace.com (pc1-rdng1-4-cust239.winn.cable.ntl.com [80.3.250.239]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5261843E65 for ; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 03:53:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jon@witchspace.com) Received: (qmail 66543 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2002 10:53:54 -0000 Received: from lexx.witchspace.com (HELO witchspace.com) (192.168.0.1) by dookie.witchspace.com with SMTP; 25 Oct 2002 10:53:54 -0000 Message-ID: <3DB922C2.30009@witchspace.com> Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 11:53:54 +0100 From: Jonathan Belson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20021022 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: [Q] Sockets verses message queues? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Hiya I'm writing an application which will fork into two processes (master/slave), and I require that the two be able to communicate asynchronously. The master will send commands to the slave then get on with other things, and the slave will send a message back when it's finished. Is there any advantage to using AF_UNIX sockets rather than message queues, or vice versa (I was thinking about speed, but sockets seem to be more complicated code-wise)? Cheers, --Jon http://www.witchspace.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message