Thrift 和 Protocol Buffers 比较

 ThriftProtocol Buffers Backers Bindings Output Formats Primitive Types Enumerations Constants Composite Type Exception Type Documentation License Compiler Language RPC Interfaces RPC Implementation Composite Type Extensions

Facebook, Apache (accepted for incubation)	Google
C++, Java, Python, PHP, XSD, Ruby, C#, Perl, Objective C, Erlang, Smalltalk, OCaml, and Haskell	C++, Java, Python (Perl, Ruby, and C# under discussion)
Binary, JSON	Binary
bool byte 16/32/64-bit integers double string byte sequence map<t1,t2> list<t> set<t>	bool 32/64-bit integers float double string byte sequence “repeated” properties act like lists
Yes	Yes
Yes	No
struct	message
Yes	No
So-so	Good
BSD-style	Apache
C++	C++
Yes	Yes
Yes	No
No	Yes

 

http://stuartsierra.com/2008/07/10/thrift-vs-protocol-buffers

 

Milliseconds to create an object, smaller is better. The Protobuf results is not a mistake! It was created by the builder pattern.

Milliseconds to serialize an object to a byte array, smaller is better.
Milliseconds to deserialize an object from byte array, smaller is better.
Size of the byte array of a serialized object, smaller is better.

 

http://eishay.blogspot.com/2008/11/serialization-protobuf-vs-thrift-vs.html

 

从比较可以看出来，Thrift是很不错的，只是，现在似乎在windows编译有点麻烦。