TROIndyTCPChannel vs TROSuperTcpChannel vs TROSynapseSuperTCPChannel

Data Abstract
1

question about the difference between channels, which one is to be preferred (LAN use)

i’m reevaluating the core DA configs and although we supports almost all channels configurable, we rely on the plain TROSuperTcpChannel

on the contrary in develop mode i’m running on TROSuperTcpChannel

since it’s been a long while i wonder as to why we would stick with the TROSuperTcpChannel and not use TROSuperTcpChannel as standard…

and then arises the question why TROSynapseSuperTCPChannel exists…

so is there a document available which explains the diffs?

tia,

M.

2

Hi,

Difference between Legacy TCP Channel and Super TCP Channel are described in their articles.

in brief,

  • plain tcp channels: lightweight communication over raw TCP.
  • super tcp channels: sophisticated and flexible two-way communication between clients and servers.

each channel has own advantages and disadvantages.
better to test both and see what channel is more suitable for your needs.

We have 4 implementations of super tcp channels:

main difference - they are wrappers for existing 3rd party libraries, like Grijjy, Indy and Synapse.

3

i guess the online doc for TROSuperTcpChannel.Busy is incorrect?

since TROSuperTcpChannel should be able to process multiple threaded calls out of the box?

Busy (declared in TROTransportChannel)

Informs whether the channel is currently busy executing a remote request (true) or not (false). Most channels (except most notably the TROSuperTCPChannel) are only capable of performing one request at a time; if a second request is attempted while the channel is Busy, an EROChannelBusy exception will be raised.

4

Hi,

all super channels can execute multiple requests, i.e. Busy for them always False.