Thrift 和 Protocol Buffers 比较

	Thrift	Protocol Buffers
Backers	Facebook, Apache (accepted for incubation)	Google
Bindings	C++, Java, Python, PHP, XSD, Ruby, C#, Perl, Objective C, Erlang, Smalltalk, OCaml, and Haskell	C++, Java, Python (Perl, Ruby, and C# under discussion)
Output Formats	Binary, JSON	Binary
Primitive Types	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
Enumerations	Yes	Yes
Constants	Yes	No
Composite Type	struct	message
Exception Type	Yes	No
Documentation	So-so	Good
License	BSD-style	Apache
Compiler Language	C++	C++
RPC Interfaces	Yes	Yes
RPC Implementation	Yes	No
Composite Type Extensions	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。