Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > Python > Looking for an IPC solution

Reply
Thread Tools

Looking for an IPC solution

 
 
Laszlo Nagy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-31-2012
There are just so many IPC modules out there. I'm looking for a solution
for developing a new a multi-tier application. The core application will
be running on a single computer, so the IPC should be using shared
memory (or mmap) and have very short response times. But there will be a
tier that will hold application state for clients, and there will be
lots of clients. So that tier needs to go to different computers. E.g.
the same IPC should also be accessed over TCP/IP. Most messages will be
simple data structures, nothing complicated. The ability to run on PyPy
would, and also to run on both Windows and Linux would be a plus.

I have seen a stand alone cross platform IPC server before that could
serve "channels", and send/receive messages using these channels. But I
don't remember its name and now I cannot find it. Can somebody please help?

Thanks,

Laszlo

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Marco Nawijn
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-31-2012
On Friday, August 31, 2012 9:22:00 PM UTC+2, Laszlo Nagy wrote:
> There are just so many IPC modules out there. I'm looking for a solution
>
> for developing a new a multi-tier application. The core application will
>
> be running on a single computer, so the IPC should be using shared
>
> memory (or mmap) and have very short response times. But there will be a
>
> tier that will hold application state for clients, and there will be
>
> lots of clients. So that tier needs to go to different computers. E.g.
>
> the same IPC should also be accessed over TCP/IP. Most messages will be
>
> simple data structures, nothing complicated. The ability to run on PyPy
>
> would, and also to run on both Windows and Linux would be a plus.
>
>
>
> I have seen a stand alone cross platform IPC server before that could
>
> serve "channels", and send/receive messages using these channels. But I
>
> don't remember its name and now I cannot find it. Can somebody please help?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Laszlo


Hi,

Are you aware and have you considered zeromq (www.zeromq.org)? It does not provide a messaging system, but you could use things like simple strings (json) or more complicated things like Protobuf.

Marco
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Marco Nawijn
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-31-2012
On Friday, August 31, 2012 9:22:00 PM UTC+2, Laszlo Nagy wrote:
> There are just so many IPC modules out there. I'm looking for a solution
>
> for developing a new a multi-tier application. The core application will
>
> be running on a single computer, so the IPC should be using shared
>
> memory (or mmap) and have very short response times. But there will be a
>
> tier that will hold application state for clients, and there will be
>
> lots of clients. So that tier needs to go to different computers. E.g.
>
> the same IPC should also be accessed over TCP/IP. Most messages will be
>
> simple data structures, nothing complicated. The ability to run on PyPy
>
> would, and also to run on both Windows and Linux would be a plus.
>
>
>
> I have seen a stand alone cross platform IPC server before that could
>
> serve "channels", and send/receive messages using these channels. But I
>
> don't remember its name and now I cannot find it. Can somebody please help?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Laszlo


Hi,

Are you aware and have you considered zeromq (www.zeromq.org)? It does not provide a messaging system, but you could use things like simple strings (json) or more complicated things like Protobuf.

Marco
 
Reply With Quote
 
Paul Rubin
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-31-2012
Laszlo Nagy <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> application will be running on a single computer, so the IPC should be
> using shared memory (or mmap) and have very short response times.


Zeromq (suggested by someone) is an option since it's pretty fast for
most purposes, but I don't think it uses shared memory. The closest
thing I can think of to what you're asking is MPI, intended for
scientific computation. I don't know of general purpose IPC that uses
it though I've thought it would be interesting. There are also some
shared memory modules around, including POSH for shared objects, but
they don't switch between memory and sockets AFAIK.

Based on your description, maybe what you really want is Erlang, or
something like it for Python. There would be more stuff to do than just
supply an IPC library.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Laszlo Nagy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-31-2012
> Zeromq (suggested by someone) is an option since it's pretty fast for
> most purposes, but I don't think it uses shared memory.

Interesting question. The documentation says:

http://api.zeromq.org/2-1:zmq-ipc

The inter-process transport is currently only implemented on operating
systems that provide UNIX domain sockets.

(OFF: Would it be possible to add local IPC support for Windows using
mmap()? I have seen others doing it.)

At least, it is functional on Windows, and it excels on Linux. I just
need to make transports configureable. Good enough for me.
> The closest
> thing I can think of to what you're asking is MPI, intended for
> scientific computation. I don't know of general purpose IPC that uses
> it though I've thought it would be interesting. There are also some
> shared memory modules around, including POSH for shared objects, but
> they don't switch between memory and sockets AFAIK.
>
> Based on your description, maybe what you really want is Erlang, or
> something like it for Python. There would be more stuff to do than just
> supply an IPC library.

Yes, although I would really like to do this job in Python. I'm going to
make some tests with zeromq. If the speed is good for local
inter-process communication, then I'll give it a try.

Thanks,

Laszlo

 
Reply With Quote
 
Wolfgang Keller
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-01-2012
> There are just so many IPC modules out there. I'm looking for a
> solution for developing a new a multi-tier application. The core
> application will be running on a single computer, so the IPC should
> be using shared memory (or mmap) and have very short response times.


Probably the fastest I/RPC implementation for Python should be
OmniOrbpy:

http://omniorb.sourceforge.net/

It's cross-platform, language-independent and standard-(Corba-)
compliant.

> I have seen a stand alone cross platform IPC server before that could
> serve "channels", and send/receive messages using these channels. But
> I don't remember its name and now I cannot find it. Can somebody
> please help?


If it's just for "messaging", Spread should be interesting:

http://www.spread.org/

Also cross-platform & language-independent.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang
 
Reply With Quote
 
Aaron Brady
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-02-2012
On Friday, August 31, 2012 2:22:00 PM UTC-5, Laszlo Nagy wrote:
> There are just so many IPC modules out there. I'm looking for a solution
>
> for developing a new a multi-tier application. The core application will
>
> be running on a single computer, so the IPC should be using shared
>
> memory (or mmap) and have very short response times. But there will be a
>
> tier that will hold application state for clients, and there will be
>
> lots of clients. So that tier needs to go to different computers. E.g.
>
> the same IPC should also be accessed over TCP/IP. Most messages will be
>
> simple data structures, nothing complicated. The ability to run on PyPy
>
> would, and also to run on both Windows and Linux would be a plus.
>
>
>
> I have seen a stand alone cross platform IPC server before that could
>
> serve "channels", and send/receive messages using these channels. But I
>
> don't remember its name and now I cannot find it. Can somebody please help?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Laszlo


Hi Laszlo,

There aren't a lot of ways to create a Python object in an "mmap" buffer. "mmap" is conducive to arrays of arrays. For variable-length structures like strings and lists, you need "dynamic allocation". The C functions "malloc" and "free" allocate memory space, and file creation and deletion routines operate on disk space. However "malloc" doesn't allow you to allocate memory space within memory that's already allocated. Operating systems don't provide that capability, and doing it yourself amounts to creating your own file system. If you did, you still might not be able to use existing libraries like the STL or Python, because one address might refer to different locations in different processes.

One solution is to keep a linked list of free blocks within your "mmap" buffer. It is prone to slow access times and segment fragmentation. Another solution is to create many small files with fixed-length names. The minimum file size on your system might become prohibitive depending on your constraints, since a 4-byte integer could occupy 4096 bytes on disk or more. Oryou can serialize the arguments and return values of your functions, and make requests to a central process.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Aaron Brady
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-02-2012
On Friday, August 31, 2012 2:22:00 PM UTC-5, Laszlo Nagy wrote:
> There are just so many IPC modules out there. I'm looking for a solution
>
> for developing a new a multi-tier application. The core application will
>
> be running on a single computer, so the IPC should be using shared
>
> memory (or mmap) and have very short response times. But there will be a
>
> tier that will hold application state for clients, and there will be
>
> lots of clients. So that tier needs to go to different computers. E.g.
>
> the same IPC should also be accessed over TCP/IP. Most messages will be
>
> simple data structures, nothing complicated. The ability to run on PyPy
>
> would, and also to run on both Windows and Linux would be a plus.
>
>
>
> I have seen a stand alone cross platform IPC server before that could
>
> serve "channels", and send/receive messages using these channels. But I
>
> don't remember its name and now I cannot find it. Can somebody please help?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Laszlo


Hi Laszlo,

There aren't a lot of ways to create a Python object in an "mmap" buffer. "mmap" is conducive to arrays of arrays. For variable-length structures like strings and lists, you need "dynamic allocation". The C functions "malloc" and "free" allocate memory space, and file creation and deletion routines operate on disk space. However "malloc" doesn't allow you to allocate memory space within memory that's already allocated. Operating systems don't provide that capability, and doing it yourself amounts to creating your own file system. If you did, you still might not be able to use existing libraries like the STL or Python, because one address might refer to different locations in different processes.

One solution is to keep a linked list of free blocks within your "mmap" buffer. It is prone to slow access times and segment fragmentation. Another solution is to create many small files with fixed-length names. The minimum file size on your system might become prohibitive depending on your constraints, since a 4-byte integer could occupy 4096 bytes on disk or more. Oryou can serialize the arguments and return values of your functions, and make requests to a central process.
 
Reply With Quote
 
vasudevram
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-03-2012
On Saturday, September 1, 2012 6:25:36 PM UTC+5:30, Wolfgang Keller wrote:
> > There are just so many IPC modules out there. I'm looking for a

>
> > solution for developing a new a multi-tier application. The core

>
> > application will be running on a single computer, so the IPC should

>
> > be using shared memory (or mmap) and have very short response times.

>
>
>
> Probably the fastest I/RPC implementation for Python should be
>
> OmniOrbpy:
>
>
>
> http://omniorb.sourceforge.net/
>
>
>
> It's cross-platform, language-independent and standard-(Corba-)
>
> compliant.
>
>
>
> > I have seen a stand alone cross platform IPC server before that could

>
> > serve "channels", and send/receive messages using these channels. But

>
> > I don't remember its name and now I cannot find it. Can somebody

>
> > please help?

>
>
>
> If it's just for "messaging", Spread should be interesting:
>
>
>
> http://www.spread.org/
>
>
>
> Also cross-platform & language-independent.
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> Wolfgang


Though I'm not the OP, thanks for the info. Will put Spread on my stack to check out ...

 
Reply With Quote
 
Laszlo Nagy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2012

> Hi Laszlo,
>
> There aren't a lot of ways to create a Python object in an "mmap" buffer. "mmap" is conducive to arrays of arrays. For variable-length structures like strings and lists, you need "dynamic allocation". The C functions "malloc" and "free" allocate memory space, and file creation and deletion routines operate on disk space. However "malloc" doesn't allow you to allocate memory space within memory that's already allocated. Operating systems don't provide that capability, and doing it yourself amounts to creating your own file system. If you did, you still might not be able to use existing libraries like the STL or Python, because one address might refer to different locations in different processes.
>
> One solution is to keep a linked list of free blocks within your "mmap" buffer. It is prone to slow access times and segment fragmentation. Another solution is to create many small files with fixed-length names. The minimum file size on your system might become prohibitive depending on your constraints, since a 4-byte integer could occupy 4096 bytes on disk or more. Or you can serialize the arguments and return values of your functions, and make requests to a central process.

I'm not sure about the technical details, but I was said that
multiprocessing module uses mmap() under windows. And it is faster than
TCP/IP. So I guess the same thing could be used from zmq, under Windows.
(It is not a big concern, I plan to operate server on Unix. Some clients
might be running on Windows, but they will use TCP/IP.)
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: Looking for an IPC solution Gelonida N Python 0 09-06-2012 09:59 AM
Re: Looking for an IPC solution Gelonida N Python 0 09-06-2012 09:25 AM
Re: Looking for an IPC solution Gelonida N Python 0 09-06-2012 09:23 AM
Re: Looking for an IPC solution Jean-Michel Pichavant Python 0 09-03-2012 08:54 AM
Re: Looking for an IPC solution Antoine Pitrou Python 0 08-31-2012 09:05 PM



Advertisments