On 11 June 2013 01:15, Marten Feldtmann itli...@schrievkrom.de wrote:
you mean: impossible .same host, when the applications have the
same network parameters ?
Correct,
To make a reliable publisher one of the following parameters should be
different: network adapter, network port,
Marten Feldtmann itlists at schrievkrom.de writes:
On 10.06.2013 22:23, Steven McCoy wrote:
It is impossible to have multiple reliable publishers on the same host -
they cannot both receive NAK unicast messages.
Unlike the consumption side the publish side needs broker design
On 11 June 2013 10:29, Chinmay Nerurkar chinmay.nerur...@fusionts.comwrote:
Thanks for the explanation. We need to have multiple publishers (publishing
to one multicast channel) on the same host. As a follow-up to Marten's
question, would the following design be an optimal solution to the
Does multicast loopback work without known issues on linux (regardless of java
or not)?
From: zeromq-dev-boun...@lists.zeromq.org
[mailto:zeromq-dev-boun...@lists.zeromq.org] On Behalf Of Steven McCoy
Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2013 9:03 AM
To: ZeroMQ development list
Subject: Re: [zeromq-dev]
On 10 June 2013 11:37, Parag Patel parag.pa...@fusionts.com wrote:
Does multicast loopback work without known issues on linux (regardless
of java or not)?
If you start the subscriber before the publisher it relies on undefined
behaviour but works. The subscriber would thus see
Thanks for the info Steven. In your email previous to this, you provided a
preferred solution. Would this work if there are multiple processes that want
to send on the same pgm + ipc channel?
From: zeromq-dev-boun...@lists.zeromq.org
[mailto:zeromq-dev-boun...@lists.zeromq.org] On Behalf Of
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 6:02 PM, Parag Patel parag.pa...@fusionts.comwrote:
Thanks for the info Steven. In your email previous to this, you
provided a preferred solution. Would this work if there are multiple
processes that want to send on the same pgm + ipc channel?
PGM in ZMQ is for
On 10 June 2013 15:56, Ian Barber ian.bar...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 6:02 PM, Parag Patel parag.pa...@fusionts.comwrote:
Thanks for the info Steven. In your email previous to this, you
provided a preferred solution. Would this work if there are multiple
processes that
On 10.06.2013 22:23, Steven McCoy wrote:
It is impossible to have multiple reliable publishers on the same host -
they cannot both receive NAK unicast messages.
Unlike the consumption side the publish side needs broker design attention.
you mean: impossible .same host, when the
We are building a system using ZeroMQ 3.2.3 which will have processes
publishing/subscribing on/to multicast channels using PGM (epgm). We would
ideally like to have the capability to let a process subscribe to a multicast
group where the publishing process resides on the same host. This
If you use MULTICAST_LOOP, you break PGM reliability (Steve explains
why in that email).
The feature was removed to stop people using it and then asking why
PGM wasn't working.
-Pieter
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 12:12 AM, Chinmay Nerurkar
chinmay.nerur...@fusionts.com wrote:
We are building a
Yes, but now we have to answer theses questions and actually all answers
are not the way that they are clear in a sense, that programmers might
know, what that means in real live.
As I understand the situation:
- the reason are mainly due to the Windows platform
- it is not allowed to have a
If anyone really wants the MULTICAST_LOOP functionality, we can add it
back and try to make the documentation and defaults clear...
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Marten Feldtmann
itli...@schrievkrom.de wrote:
Yes, but now we have to answer theses questions and actually all answers
are not
13 matches
Mail list logo
