Hi Pieter, hi all,
On 03/20/2012 11:35 PM, Pieter Hintjens wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Steffen Mueller
m...@steffen-mueller.net wrote:
I'd be really happy to get some feedback on both the ZMQ::Declare
library and the suggestions regarding the ZDCF spec.
First off, it's really
2012/3/22 Robert G. Jakabosky bo...@sharedrealm.com:
zmq sockets are alway level-triggered. Your code should call
zmq_send/zmq_recv until it returns EAGAIN, then register the FD for read
events with your event loop. Your code also needs to alway pass the
ZMQ_NOBLOCK flag to
Hi,
I want to install jzmq to another location(for example instead of
/usr/local/lib/libzmq.so.1.0.0
to $home/x/). Because i haven't a root password in my system so that I
have to install without root permissions. How can I do that?
Thanks
Best Regards...
--
*BURAK ISIKLI** *|
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 1:59 AM, Steffen Mueller
zer...@steffen-mueller.net wrote:
I'll tackle the other two, but I'd love to get approval for the
versioning before I proceed.
It looks perfect.
-Pieter
___
zeromq-dev mailing list
Check out the documentation on devices and pyzmq as well as the zguide
... whenever i start a zmq.device(zmq.Forwarder), this blocks my interpreter,
so is there any way of starting a forwarder always as a different process or
any ways of making it non-blocking.
On Friday 23, Andrzej K. Haczewski wrote:
2012/3/22 Robert G. Jakabosky bo...@sharedrealm.com:
zmq sockets are alway level-triggered. Your code should call
zmq_send/zmq_recv until it returns EAGAIN, then register the FD for read
events with your event loop. Your code also needs to alway
On 03/23/2012 03:59 PM, Pieter Hintjens wrote:
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 1:59 AM, Steffen Mueller
zer...@steffen-mueller.net wrote:
I'll tackle the other two, but I'd love to get approval for the
versioning before I proceed.
It looks perfect.
So now for the potentially more contentious
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 1:01 PM, Steffen Mueller
m...@steffen-mueller.net wrote:
So now for the potentially more contentious changes...
They're fine (and should not be contentious) as long as they are
minimal solutions to real problems.
I've made a few cosmetic fixes to the text.
-Pieter
Hi Andrzej,
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 12:31 PM, Andrzej K. Haczewski
ahaczew...@gmail.com wrote:
There is one thing that bothers me though: why does the scheme I used
works for ZeroMQ 3.1.0 and CrossroadsIO, as I tired both and they work
with registering FD right away with no recv() calls in
Hi Steffen,
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 8:01 PM, Steffen Mueller
m...@steffen-mueller.net wrote:
Again, I'd appreciate review before I run with it in my Perl implementation.
Is there any good reason to specify both, socket types and device type?
I'd say device type is redundant. The point is even
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Paul Colomiets p...@colomiets.name wrote:
Is there any good reason to specify both, socket types and device type?
You can, and people sometimes do, mix these. Otherwise, indeed it's not useful.
Is there any good reason to specify xrep vs rep socket types?
I
Hi all,
I've just made a pull request for a fix for issue #325
(https://zeromq.jira.com/browse/LIBZMQ-325) which caused libzmq to
crash if two clients connected to a ROUTER or REP socket with the same
identity.
My fix is to allow this (and not assert!) so that the second client's
identity
Hi Pieter,
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 12:09 AM, Pieter Hintjens p...@imatix.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Paul Colomiets p...@colomiets.name wrote:
Is there any good reason to specify both, socket types and device type?
You can, and people sometimes do, mix these. Otherwise,
Hi Pieter,
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 12:45 AM, Pieter Hintjens p...@imatix.com wrote:
I've just made a pull request for a fix for issue #325
(https://zeromq.jira.com/browse/LIBZMQ-325) which caused libzmq to
crash if two clients connected to a ROUTER or REP socket with the same
identity.
This
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:45 PM, Pieter Hintjens p...@imatix.com wrote:
My fix is to allow this (and not assert!) so that the second client's
identity request will be ignored. This means a well-behaving client
and server can't be disturbed by an incorrect or hostile client.
Great, thanks,
This is for routing only, we don't do durable sockets any longer in 3.1. So
it should be OK.
On Mar 23, 2012 6:09 PM, Ian Barber ian.bar...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:45 PM, Pieter Hintjens p...@imatix.com wrote:
My fix is to allow this (and not assert!) so that the second
16 matches
Mail list logo
