On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Robert Collins <robe...@robertcollins.net> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 4:33 AM, Stuart Bishop > <stuart.bis...@canonical.com> wrote: >> I've refactored this into parts and added the client side code I think >> we need. I've also added ZeroMQ as an alternative transport. > > Cool!. I'd like to tie > https://dev.launchpad.net/ArchitectureGuide/ServicesRequirements in > here: the server and the client should be in separate trees so that > the LP isn't *able* to bypass stuff and import the server. e.g. > gpgverify_client.
Sure. This is just a mock up at the moment. I'd like to get backend independent APIs for RPC, Queue and Pub/Topic subscription in the LP tree or somewhere. > I think once you have a broker 0mq starts to look a lot more like > haproxy+http; its real strengths lie in point to point arrangements. > Of course, as I'm still a total noob, this is probably wrong :) So for point to point RPC, I think you either need to hard code all the endpoints or implement a directory, and the load balancing gets bogus. > I'm very glad we're getting some experience with different protocols; > let the party continue :). Did we discount XML-RPC for any particular reason? I think maybe that, rabbit and peoples personal favorite web frameworks up next if people are enthusiastic. -- Stuart Bishop <stu...@stuartbishop.net> http://www.stuartbishop.net/ _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev Post to : launchpad-dev@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
