> Nanomsg seems not be active these days. I prefer to have use raw socket for > communication.
It sounds reasonable to me. If ps have a plan to use Intel DPDK, it's a good option to consider seastar framework. It's distributed under ALv2. https://github.com/scylladb/seastar Thanks - Tsuyoshi On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 8:21 AM, Li, Mu <[email protected]> wrote: > Nanomsg seems not be active these days. I prefer to have use raw socket for > communication. > > One question I have is that, zeromq indicates we can link against zeromq if > no change is made. > > I think our situation means this requirement, the only place we used zeromq > is this file: https://github.com/dmlc/ps-lite/blob/master/src/zmq_van.h. Then > we download zermq and compile it during make: > https://github.com/dmlc/ps-lite/blob/master/make/deps.mk#L21 > > Best > Mu > On Feb 22, 2017, at 1:24 AM, Henri Yandell > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > It's sounding like nanomsg is the direction to go. Any other thoughts? > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Minjie Wang > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > My colleagues and I are working on adding more support for data > transmission. For example, send/recv operators in dataflow graph to support > some fancier parallelism. I feel like this could be part of mxnet in the > future (need more discussions for sure). Currently, we are using zeromq > since we already depend on it. Does that mean we should actually consider > using other libraries? > > For 3), it should not be hard since we are only transmitting arrays. We > don't need to support rich types and complex data structures like normal > RPC. > > - Minjie > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 11:53 AM, Will, Martin > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> > wrote: > > Re 3.) Nanomsg is licensed under BSD. [http://nanomsg.org/]. It’s > written > by one of the original authors of zeromq, and can be considered as an > evolution it. The API mostly maps 1-to-1. > > - Martin > > > On 2/20/17, 11:54 PM, "Henri Yandell" > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > How tied is MXNet to ZeroMQ? > > My notes are that ps-lite depends on it. > > Options I can see here are: > > 1) Discuss on general@incubator and determine if the exception is > acceptable. I suspect this is unlikely given that Apache Toree had a > problem with jeromq which led to jeromq very kindly relicensing to > MPL > ( > https://github.com/zeromq/jeromq/issues/326). > 2) Request libzmq relicense to MPL. This is something the project has > begun, but seems to be in frozen currently (unless I'm missing recent > activity). > 3) Rewrite MXNet to not rely on zeromq. How difficult would that be? > 4) Switching MXNet to use something other than ps-lite? (Not sure if > that's > easier than #3). > > Any thoughts on #3 + #4? > > Thanks, > > Hen > > > > > > -- > Minjie Wang > *New York University | Computer Science* > 715 Broadway, New York, NY, 10009 > >
