On Thursday, September 7, 2017 at 11:56:37 PM UTC-4, Jack Firth wrote:
> On Thursday, September 7, 2017 at 9:11:47 AM UTC-7, Brian Adkins wrote:
> > I'm considering having a group of programmers create micro-services in 
> > various programming languages to be glued together into a single 
> > application. I would like a communication mechanism with the following 
> > characteristics:
> > 
> > * More efficient than HTTP
> Unfortunately Racket doesn't have an HTTP/2 implementation, or I would 
> recommend that. Could you elaborate on your efficiency requirements? It's 
> possible a proxy that handled HTTP/2 connections could work for you and I 
> suspect that would be much simpler than trying to make your own APIs atop a 
> lower-level messaging protocol like ZeroMQ.

This is more of an experiment in a ridiculously distributed application to 
allow people to use their favorite programming language w/o a shared VM such as 
JVM, CLR or Erlang. So, ideally, the latency would be as low as possible.

For a toy experiment, HTTP would be fine, and would probably even perform 
"reasonably" well with a small load, but I was curious about how far things 
could be pushed with respect to micro services.

It may be that a simple TCP protocol is the way to go with a simple 
serialization mechanism.

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to