<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><div>On Mar 19, 2013, at 10:41 PM, Ron Tsoref wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr">The PipeBackend seems easy to implement. Does anyone actually use a PipeBackend in production and can share some general performance information? Is it much slower than other backends?<div class="gmail_extra">
<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>We've been able to squeeze 50000 qps out of a pipe backend. On a philosophical note, pipes are likely to be faster than TCP/IP, and SQL marshalling/unmarshaling is not free either.</div><div><br></div><div>People associate 'text based' with slow, but most SQL protocols are just as parsed, or even more so.</div><div><br></div><div>The pipe backend does have a performance bottleneck in 3.2 if you specify a timeout, see <a href="http://wiki.powerdns.com/trac/ticket/661">http://wiki.powerdns.com/trac/ticket/661</a></div><div><br></div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Bert</div><div><br></div></div></body></html>