3 ms·
If different components of your system are talking over a pretend network you've already architectured yourself face first into a pile of shit. There's no argu
by alexvitkov 3y ago
If different components of your system are talking over a pretend network you've already architectured yourself face first into a pile of shit. There's no argument for quality either way so I'll just use TCP sockets and save myself 2 hours when I inevitably have to get it running on Windows.
- radlad 3y agoFYI, Windows supports Unix domain sockets since Windows 10 / Server 2019.
- alexvitkov 3y agoGood thing to mention, thanks. That's mostly why I said 2 hours and not a day, as you still have to deal with paths (there's no /run) and you may have to fickle with UAC or god save us NTFS permissions
- adzm 3y agoI had not head of this! Long story short, AF_UNIX now exists for Windows development. https://devblogs.microsoft.com/commandline/af_unix-comes-to-windows/ https://devblogs.microsoft.com/commandline/af_unix-comes-to-... https://visualrecode.com/blog/unix-sockets/#:~:text=Unix%20domain%20sockets%20are%20an,work%20like%20regular%20network%20sockets https://visualrecode.com/blog/unix-sockets/#:~:text=Unix%20d....
- mhuffman 3y ago>If different components of your system are talking over a pretend network you've already architectured yourself face first into a pile of shit. How do you have your file delivery, database, and business logic "talk" to each other? Everything on the same computer is a "pretend network" to some extent, right? Do you always architect your own database right into your business logic along with a web-server as a single monolith? One off SPAs must take 2-3 months!
- alexvitkov 3y agoYes, replacing a full duty database with an in-process SQLite generally simplifies things if you can afford it. Even if not that's a bad example, since in prod your fat database will be om another computer for real, so you'd never use a Unix socket when developing locally.