hi Pieter,
What you probably want to make, what most developers end up making, is
a framework that does the messaging you need (using ZeroMQ) and hides
this from your application.
100% true. This is what I'm doing. In java.
A TTL is hugely application dependent. Putting this into ZeroMQ
On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 10:28 AM, artemv zmq artemv@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, true, TTL is abstract thing. But, with high probability, everyone
would want this: I want a setting of how long message lives in sending
_and/or_ receiving queue.
And yet you are the first person to request this
hi Pieter,
You're still not explaining what problem this solves
Ok. Here's the problem which I faced recently. Here's appl. architecture
(to keep discussion focused):
iOS/Android (game ui) ssl Tomcat bet_service .
There are three layers (from left to right): game UI (0),
If the Tomcat service (layer 1) sends messages asynchronously to the betting
service (layer 2), then how is it possible to timeout the response back to the
iOS/Android app (layer 0)?
-Matt
On 29 Dec 2013, at 8:13 pm, artemv zmq artemv@gmail.com wrote:
hi Pieter,
You're still not
hi Matt,
The game UI does handle response timeout. Tomcat just transfers traffic
back and forth.
2013/12/29 Matt Connolly matt.conno...@me.com
If the Tomcat service (layer 1) sends messages asynchronously to the
betting service (layer 2), then how is it possible to timeout the response
On 29 Dec 2013, at 9:33 pm, artemv zmq artemv@gmail.com wrote:
hi Matt,
The game UI does handle response timeout. Tomcat just transfers traffic
back and forth.
But if the message is sent asynchronously to the betting service, then where
does the timeout come from?
-Matt
] Why 0mq doesn't define TTL for message (for in-mem
queue)?
hi Pieter,
You're still not explaining what problem this solves
Ok. Here's the problem which I faced recently. Here's appl. architecture (to
keep discussion focused):
iOS/Android (game ui) ssl Tomcat bet_service
On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 11:13 AM, artemv zmq artemv@gmail.com wrote:
I can implement TTL myself, making it being as a part of message, _but_ I
don't want to do that, because, TTL is low level thing, so fixing it at
higher level would bring more problems, I suppose.
Do you know, or do you
Perhaps. What problem would you be solving with TTLs, which is an
issue today? (Lack of feature X is not a valid problem statement for
feature X).
There's a need to send certain type of messages which have sort of use-by
date attribute.
I.e. client may want to define this attribute and
case.
From: zeromq-dev-boun...@lists.zeromq.org
[mailto:zeromq-dev-boun...@lists.zeromq.org] On Behalf Of artemv zmq
Sent: Saturday, December 28, 2013 1:34 PM
To: ZeroMQ development list
Subject: Re: [zeromq-dev] Why 0mq doesn't define TTL for message (for in-mem
queue)?
Perhaps. What problem
Subject: Re: [zeromq-dev] Why 0mq doesn't define TTL for message (for in-mem
queue)?
Perhaps. What problem would you be solving with TTLs, which is an
issue today? (Lack of feature X is not a valid problem statement for
feature X).
There's a need to send certain type of messages which
*To:* ZeroMQ development list
*Subject:* Re: [zeromq-dev] Why 0mq doesn't define TTL for message (for
in-mem queue)?
Perhaps. What problem would you be solving with TTLs, which is an
issue today? (Lack of feature X is not a valid problem statement for
feature X).
There's a need to send certain type
*Subject:*Re: [zeromq-dev] Why 0mq doesn't define TTL for message
(for in-mem queue)?
Perhaps. What problem would you be solving with TTLs, which is an
issue today? (Lack of feature X is not a valid problem
statement for
feature X).
There's a need to send certain type
Of artemv zmq
Sent: Saturday, December 28, 2013 3:52 PM
To: ZeroMQ development list
Subject: Re: [zeromq-dev] Why 0mq doesn't define TTL for message (for in-mem
queue)?
So if the traffic is not relevant, there is nothing IMHO to be done on ØMQ.
Just add a TTL to a part of the multipart message
zmq
*Sent:* Saturday, December 28, 2013 3:52 PM
*To:* ZeroMQ development list
*Subject:* Re: [zeromq-dev] Why 0mq doesn't define TTL for message (for
in-mem queue)?
So if the traffic is not relevant, there is nothing IMHO to be done on
ØMQ. Just add a TTL to a part of the multipart message
On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 9:52 PM, artemv zmq artemv@gmail.com wrote:
That's what I'm talking about ). Why this can't/shouldn't be done on 0mq?
The thing is -- 0mq is queueing solution (after all) and TTL is part of any
queueing. TTL is not concrete business feature, it's very common and
hello there!
Just came to my mind -- why 0mq doesn't define TTL? 0mq still queues
messages inside in-mem queues, so eventually it's sort of queueing system
(pls. don't blame me, I'm just saying) . Right?
And all queueing solutions do have TTL .
Overall, I'm big fan of 0mq, but some principal
Though, not sure where TTL should be defined: per message or/and per in-mem
queue .
2013/12/27 artemv zmq artemv@gmail.com
hello there!
Just came to my mind -- why 0mq doesn't define TTL? 0mq still queues
messages inside in-mem queues, so eventually it's sort of queueing system
(pls.
Part of the difficulty with that is providing usable guarantees - for
example, a fair chunk of messages might be buffered in the TCP send or recv
buffers, particularly with small messages. It is relatively straightforward
to set HWM to 1 (or some other small number) and implement a queue prior to
On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 1:26 PM, artemv zmq artemv@gmail.com wrote:
And all queueing solutions do have TTL .
Perhaps. What problem would you be solving with TTLs, which is an
issue today? (Lack of feature X is not a valid problem statement for
feature X).
-Pieter
20 matches
Mail list logo
