[zeromq-dev] JZMQ Windows Instructions
Hello ZMQ staff, I think the JZMQ binding documentation for Windows needs some work, as it just took me 4 hours to get ZMQ up and running on Windows, even though I already had it working on Linux. At least the following point needs to be rewritten or updated: Note that ØMQ and JDK header file has to be on include path (/Tools|Options|Projects and Solutions|VC++ Directories|Include files/) and ØMQ libraries have to be on library path (/Tools|Options|Projects and Solutions|VC++ Directories|Library files/): These options no longer exists in MSVC 2010 and newer, which are basically required since the JZMQ project is a 2012 project. I can't really say, why I had so much trouble building the libraries, but I simply had. You might also add this little instruction to it: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11455588/how-to-run-zeromq-with-java since - if I read correctly - it was written by one of your devs. Kind regards, Jörg Specht ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
Re: [zeromq-dev] Protocol Plugins
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 3:05 AM, Lyle Thompson lthomp...@ixiacom.com wrote: I guess nobody is interested in pluggable protocols. Thanks anyway. Making pluggable protocols in the core library is just a very hard thing. It would require some major redesigns. People have added transports, and it's doable. They're not pluggable though, in the sense we usually mean. I built a simple framework for pluggable protocols over inproc bridges, some years ago: https://github.com/hintjens/vtx. It didn't get much attention. -Pieter ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
Re: [zeromq-dev] CAN Bus
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 10:05:43AM -, Florian Pichlmeier wrote: Hello, so far i have been using zeromq in some small pet projects, but have not yet worked directly on the library. In some other project there is the need to communicate over the CAN bus, everything on Linux. I was wondering if it would be feasible to extend zeromq for this use case? Best regards, Florian As in using the CAN bus as transport for the zmq protocol? MfG Goswin ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
[zeromq-dev] Sandstorm: 55 Gbps at 72% load
This might be of interest, if rather hilarious as an implementation of anything. Basically a static content webserver that stores content as a tcpdump and just replays the packets bypassing any serious CPU effort. http://highscalability.com/blog/2014/2/12/paper-network-stack-specialization-for-performance.html -- Steve-o ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
Re: [zeromq-dev] What differentiates connected peers on a ZMTP point of view ?
I have finally managed to proxy ZMTP over a ZMQ_STREAM socket tunel, with several clients and several workers, with the following architecture: ___client A___ server_ proxy __worker B __ _tunel A__ _midpoint_ Client tcp frontend / backend tcp frontend / backend ---tcp Worker DEALER ZMQ_STREAM DEALER ROUTER ZMQ_STREAMDEALER CURVE NULL NULL CURVE I have to admit I have had a very hard time to achieve this. Thanks again Goswin. Laurent Le 11/02/2014 10:02, Goswin von Brederlow a écrit : On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 05:31:34PM +0100, Laurent Alebarde wrote: Le 10/02/2014 10:43, Goswin von Brederlow a écrit : On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 04:34:03PM +0100, Laurent Alebarde wrote: Hi Devs, I wonder please what differentiates connected peers on a ZMTP point of view ? To be more clear, let's consider this network: Client 1 205.23.12.47 Server Client 2 102.12.88.254 --/ In ZMTP internals, I assume it creates a pipe associated with each origin address, and on an API side, it provides one identity associated to each one. So it creates one mechanism for each pipe and knows which instance to use every time in the stateful handcheck process. Is it correct ? there is a bijective association between the origin address and the identity ? Let's say that now we have a proxy in between: Client 1 205.23.12.47 --- Proxy --- Server Client 2 102.12.88.254 --/92.123.321.22 ZMTP on server side has no way to differentiate between Client1 and 2. Every message arrives in the same pipe which is the one corresponding to its closest peer: the proxy and its address. The only way for the server to differentiate the clients is at application level, when identities are stacked in the former frames of each message ? I am a bit confused. Can someone clarify for me please and point in the libzmq code what is taken into account to identify the pipes ? http://zguide.zeromq.org/page:all#The-Extended-Reply-Envelope A zmq message does not have just one identity. It has any number of identity frames followed by an empty delimiter frame followed by data frames. Normaly on each hop an identity frame is added. Depending on the socket type when sending the first identity is used to decied where to send the message and on recieve the identity of the sender is added to show where it came from: Client 1 sends:'' 'request' # REQ adds '' Proxy recieves:client 1 '' 'request' # ROUTER adds id Proxy sends: client 1 '' 'request' # DEALER Server recieves: proxy client 1 '' 'request' # REP handles ids Server replies proxy client 1 '' 'reply' # REP handles ids Proxy recieves:client1 '' 'reply' # DEALER Proxy sends: client1 '' 'reply' # ROUTER strips id Client 1 recieves: '' 'reply'# REQ strips '' The REP/REQ sockets handle the identity frames for you so the appliction never sees them. ROUTER adds/strips the first identity automatically while DEALER lets you see them all. Thanks Goswin, My question here is on the internals of libzmq: how it manages identities ws pipes. Continued below. So, if my above hypothesis are right, as I want to manage to proxy a ZMTP mechanism like in the following: ___client A___ server_ proxy __worker B __ _tunel A__ _midpoint_ Client --inproc--- frontend / backend tcp frontend / backend --inproc-- Worker DEALER ZMQ_STREAM DEALER ROUTER ZMQ_STREAM DEALER CURVE | CURVE | I have to create a pool of sockets in the proxy backend, say 1,000 if I want to authorize 1,000 simultaneous connexions, and dispatch the clients to a sticky socket, and one and only one client per socket. \|/ Client 1 -- socket 1: port 10001 Client 2 -- socket 2: port 10002 Client 1000 -- socket 1000: port 11000 So, the worker is binded to all these ports. Still, does it work here ? Does ZMTP creates a pipe per address on the worker side, even if they are binded to the same socket (the answer looks obvious but I prefer a confirmation) ? Cheers, Laurent No. You use one socket for everything and add the identity of the client to the message as you proxy it. Then on the reply you get the identity of the client back so you know where to send it. Since ROUTER adds the identity implicitly all a proxy has to do is real all message frames
[zeromq-dev] performance ressource tradeoff for sockets ws threads ?
Hi all, In a server, I want to assign one socket per client (CURVE). What is the best in terms of performance ressources ? Say I want to deal with 1,000 simultaneous clients. 1. one socket per thread with an avarage cpu load 1%, and 1,000 threads ? 2. 100 sockets per thread with an avarage cpu load near 100%, and 10 threads ? 3. anything between ? Some service delivery latency is acceptable. Laurent ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
Re: [zeromq-dev] Protocol Plugins
OK. Thanks for your feedback, Pieter. I think, then, that I will just do it the simple way. Regards, Lyle -Original Message- From: zeromq-dev-boun...@lists.zeromq.org [mailto:zeromq-dev-boun...@lists.zeromq.org] On Behalf Of Pieter Hintjens Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2014 12:30 AM To: ZeroMQ development list Subject: Re: [zeromq-dev] Protocol Plugins On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 3:05 AM, Lyle Thompson lthomp...@ixiacom.com wrote: I guess nobody is interested in pluggable protocols. Thanks anyway. Making pluggable protocols in the core library is just a very hard thing. It would require some major redesigns. People have added transports, and it's doable. They're not pluggable though, in the sense we usually mean. I built a simple framework for pluggable protocols over inproc bridges, some years ago: https://github.com/hintjens/vtx. It didn't get much attention. -Pieter ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
[zeromq-dev] Export Control Classification number for zero MQ
Hi, We are looking at using zeroMQ and NetMQ in one of our commercial software. We would like to know what is the country of origin for zeroMQ/NetMQ. If USA origin, what is the export control classification number (ECCN and/or CCATS or any other export control designation) for this component? If not, does this component perform any encryption (other than that used for authentication)? Your help would be most appreciated. Thanks. Fabien ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
[zeromq-dev] Peer to peer connection
Hi All, I'm going to develop peer to peer chat application using Zeromq but I can't find a away to for connecting two peers on different network. For example: A CoffeShop (public IP is 173.169.213.16) has peer A (private IP is 192.168.1.15) A university campaign (public IP is 87.96.124.16) has peer B (private IP is 10.14.22.19) Both A and B can access to internet freely. How do I make connection between A and B using zeromq? -- Thanks and Best Regards, Ngo Doan Lap Mobile: 0977.833.757 ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
Re: [zeromq-dev] Protocol Plugins
I think it's a worthwhile goal. In fact, I think a lot of aspects of libzmq which are currently hard-coded should be made more modular. There are two issues: 1) It's a big task, as mentioned, and someone just has to do it. 2) As a big task, it's also a big stability risk. There's a greater potential to introduce bugs than there would be with smaller changes. On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Lyle Thompson lthomp...@ixiacom.comwrote: OK. Thanks for your feedback, Pieter. I think, then, that I will just do it the simple way. Regards, Lyle -Original Message- From: zeromq-dev-boun...@lists.zeromq.org [mailto: zeromq-dev-boun...@lists.zeromq.org] On Behalf Of Pieter Hintjens Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2014 12:30 AM To: ZeroMQ development list Subject: Re: [zeromq-dev] Protocol Plugins On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 3:05 AM, Lyle Thompson lthomp...@ixiacom.com wrote: I guess nobody is interested in pluggable protocols. Thanks anyway. Making pluggable protocols in the core library is just a very hard thing. It would require some major redesigns. People have added transports, and it's doable. They're not pluggable though, in the sense we usually mean. I built a simple framework for pluggable protocols over inproc bridges, some years ago: https://github.com/hintjens/vtx. It didn't get much attention. -Pieter ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
Re: [zeromq-dev] Peer to peer connection
Each peer will use other's public ip address to connect but you have to forward ports to internal ip adresses. A will connect to tcp://87.96.124.16: or bind to tcp://*:. B will connect to tcp:173.169.213.16: or bind to tcp://*:. You both have to forward port to A's and B's internal ip:port pairs. On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Ngo Doan Lap lapngod...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, I'm going to develop peer to peer chat application using Zeromq but I can't find a away to for connecting two peers on different network. For example: A CoffeShop (public IP is 173.169.213.16) has peer A (private IP is 192.168.1.15) A university campaign (public IP is 87.96.124.16) has peer B (private IP is 10.14.22.19) Both A and B can access to internet freely. How do I make connection between A and B using zeromq? -- Thanks and Best Regards, Ngo Doan Lap Mobile: 0977.833.757 ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
[zeromq-dev] coding note: redirecting libzmq/czmq library logging
the libraries write assertion errors to stderr (eg libzmq/src/err.hpp) or stdout for debugging (e.g. zclock_log()) that's a tad annoying in a daemon setup where you'd want to have that output go to syslog instead of a terminal I found this neat trick, which enables redirection of FILE * operations (NB: not fd's like used with open/close/read/write): http://mischasan.wordpress.com/2011/05/25/redirecting-stderr-to-syslog/ with this it's easy to redirect log output for libzmq and czmq. - Michael ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
Re: [zeromq-dev] Using ZMQ for video multicast
Hi Emmanuel, Thanks. This may be not so much ZMQ related, as PGM related. If I do PGM over internet, how does it get delivered to end hosts. As far as I understand, PGM requires support by intermediate routers. Or we want to use PGM we will have to have complete control over intermediate network between endpoints. Thanks. George. On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 11:44 PM, Emmanuel Taurel tau...@esrf.fr wrote: Hi George, If you want to use PUB/SUB and multicast, you have to use ZMQ with PGM. In ZMQ, PGM is encapsulateded in UDP. Look at the so-called epgm (Encapsulated PGM) transport. Hoping this help Emmanuel Le 12.02.2014 01:24, George Kumar a écrit : Hi all, Sorry if this too basic a question for most for you on the list. I have a requirement where I need to multicast video to up to 3 recipients. I am considering ZMQ PUB/SUB model. But ZMQ does not have the option of using UDP for transport. TCP is generally discouraged for real time data like video. So what do you folks think ? Appreciate your feedback. Thanks. George ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
[zeromq-dev] How to load-balance blindly ? option to retrieve the identity assigned by the ROUTER or STREAM peer ?
Hi all, I am designing an architecture with tens of workers, each with hundreds of sockets. All the sockets connect to the same address. On the broker point of view, nothing differentiates the connections it receives except their unique identity it assigns to them. If it was one worker with 1,000 sockets or 10 workers with 100 sockets or whatever, the broker has no way to see it. That makes load balancing uneasy since the broker is blind against the workers socket repartition. I could use a different port for each worker, but it would be a huge overall redesign. So I have only one port. The idea would be that each worker could retrieve the identity of its sockets, as assigned by the broker. Then each worker would transmit to the brocker via a message the list of its identities, and the broker would be able to elaborate a load per worker. The only solution I foresee is to make use of 5 bytes of the greeting's filler to transmit this identity. Of course, it would be activated only on the activation of a new option on the broker socket, and another one on the workers ones to retrieve it. This would be not compatible with the IDENTITY. I think something like this did exist in the past ? Does someone has a better idea ? Cheers, Laurent ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
Re: [zeromq-dev] ROUTER not routing?
I'd like to move forward with fixing this. Can I get a confirmation that I should proceed? Basically I want to make it so if a connection reconnects, and an explicit identity is received from the peer, then it should overwrite any previously set identity for that peer. Also I tried to log an item in the Jira but I'm not sure how. Maybe I need special access rights? I created an account at least. Also, I see issues in github too. Which is the right place to log things? Thanks. On 02/08/2014 11:53 AM, Justin Karneges wrote: Here's an even simpler example using REQ/ROUTER: https://gist.github.com/jkarneges/1fa64e9763561f53daef It doesn't demonstrate the routing problem but it does demonstrate the identity binding oddity. You can see the ROUTER side that the envelope id is always the first id it has ever seen, even if the id printed by the REQ side is different every time. On 02/07/2014 02:33 PM, Justin Karneges wrote: Here's some small sample code to reproduce the issue: https://gist.github.com/jkarneges/ab2b1abea1ee4cfc1332 A (ztest1.py) creates REQ and ROUTER sockets. B (ztest2.py) creates REP and ROUTER sockets. B binds and provides a random identity to its ROUTER socket. A connects its sockets to B. A queries for B's id using the REQ socket, and then attempts to send a message via the ROUTER socket right after that. This is repeated every 2 seconds. A and B can be started in any order. A can be restarted and things will still work. If B is restarted, then A's ROUTER socket will never work again until A is restarted also. A uses ZMQ_ROUTER_MANDATORY to show that the failures are on A's side. On 02/07/2014 02:16 PM, Justin Karneges wrote: It is my understanding that being able to route requires the socket to have an identity mapping in its routing table for the peer. For peers that do not explicitly specify their own identity, then I believe you are correct that routing is not possible until at least one message has been received from the peer. It is at this point that the ROUTER socket will make up an identity for this peer and store it in its routing table. However, for peers that *do* explicitly specify their own identity (as I am doing), then this identity information is delivered immediately after the connection is established, allowing routing to the peer even if the peer has not sent a message yet. I should have been more clear in my original message. The B program is explicitly specifying a random UUID as the identity of its socket before binding. On 02/07/2014 02:06 PM, Panu Wetterstrand wrote: I did not quite get the problem but could this be because (I think) router is not able to route messages to socket from which it has not reveived data first... 7.2.2014 22.51 kirjoitti Justin Karneges jus...@affinix.com mailto:jus...@affinix.com: Hi, 1) ROUTER in program A is set to connect to a bind socket in program B. 2) Both programs are started, and the connection is established. 3) A determines B's socket identity out-of-band, and is able to send messages to B. 3) B is terminated and the connection is lost. 4) B is started again, and the connection is re-established. 5) A determines B's socket identity out-of-band, and is no longer able to send messages to B. It seems this problem does not happen if B retains the same socket identity across reconnects. However, if it uses a random identity (to be discovered out-of-band by A), then routing will never work again after the first restart of B. The A program must be restarted in order to make things right again. My guess is that each connect queue on a ROUTER socket is somehow bound for life against the first identity it sees. Is this intentional behavior? Thanks, Justin ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org mailto:zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
Re: [zeromq-dev] ROUTER not routing?
It's not about zmq, just imagine someone comes to you and you say him you are x, after he left someone came too, so without his identity how will you decide if he is the same person or not? On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 12:51 AM, Justin Karneges jus...@affinix.comwrote: I'd like to move forward with fixing this. Can I get a confirmation that I should proceed? Basically I want to make it so if a connection reconnects, and an explicit identity is received from the peer, then it should overwrite any previously set identity for that peer. Also I tried to log an item in the Jira but I'm not sure how. Maybe I need special access rights? I created an account at least. Also, I see issues in github too. Which is the right place to log things? Thanks. On 02/08/2014 11:53 AM, Justin Karneges wrote: Here's an even simpler example using REQ/ROUTER: https://gist.github.com/jkarneges/1fa64e9763561f53daef It doesn't demonstrate the routing problem but it does demonstrate the identity binding oddity. You can see the ROUTER side that the envelope id is always the first id it has ever seen, even if the id printed by the REQ side is different every time. On 02/07/2014 02:33 PM, Justin Karneges wrote: Here's some small sample code to reproduce the issue: https://gist.github.com/jkarneges/ab2b1abea1ee4cfc1332 A (ztest1.py) creates REQ and ROUTER sockets. B (ztest2.py) creates REP and ROUTER sockets. B binds and provides a random identity to its ROUTER socket. A connects its sockets to B. A queries for B's id using the REQ socket, and then attempts to send a message via the ROUTER socket right after that. This is repeated every 2 seconds. A and B can be started in any order. A can be restarted and things will still work. If B is restarted, then A's ROUTER socket will never work again until A is restarted also. A uses ZMQ_ROUTER_MANDATORY to show that the failures are on A's side. On 02/07/2014 02:16 PM, Justin Karneges wrote: It is my understanding that being able to route requires the socket to have an identity mapping in its routing table for the peer. For peers that do not explicitly specify their own identity, then I believe you are correct that routing is not possible until at least one message has been received from the peer. It is at this point that the ROUTER socket will make up an identity for this peer and store it in its routing table. However, for peers that *do* explicitly specify their own identity (as I am doing), then this identity information is delivered immediately after the connection is established, allowing routing to the peer even if the peer has not sent a message yet. I should have been more clear in my original message. The B program is explicitly specifying a random UUID as the identity of its socket before binding. On 02/07/2014 02:06 PM, Panu Wetterstrand wrote: I did not quite get the problem but could this be because (I think) router is not able to route messages to socket from which it has not reveived data first... 7.2.2014 22.51 kirjoitti Justin Karneges jus...@affinix.com mailto:jus...@affinix.com: Hi, 1) ROUTER in program A is set to connect to a bind socket in program B. 2) Both programs are started, and the connection is established. 3) A determines B's socket identity out-of-band, and is able to send messages to B. 3) B is terminated and the connection is lost. 4) B is started again, and the connection is re-established. 5) A determines B's socket identity out-of-band, and is no longer able to send messages to B. It seems this problem does not happen if B retains the same socket identity across reconnects. However, if it uses a random identity (to be discovered out-of-band by A), then routing will never work again after the first restart of B. The A program must be restarted in order to make things right again. My guess is that each connect queue on a ROUTER socket is somehow bound for life against the first identity it sees. Is this intentional behavior? Thanks, Justin ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org mailto: zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
Re: [zeromq-dev] ROUTER not routing?
The new peer asserts its own identity. There is not a question about whether the new peer is the same as before. The peer very clearly is or is not the same, based on the identity it provides. The problem is that remote identities are only honored for the first peer. On 02/13/2014 03:00 PM, Ahmet Kakıcı wrote: It's not about zmq, just imagine someone comes to you and you say him you are x, after he left someone came too, so without his identity how will you decide if he is the same person or not? On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 12:51 AM, Justin Karneges jus...@affinix.com mailto:jus...@affinix.com wrote: I'd like to move forward with fixing this. Can I get a confirmation that I should proceed? Basically I want to make it so if a connection reconnects, and an explicit identity is received from the peer, then it should overwrite any previously set identity for that peer. Also I tried to log an item in the Jira but I'm not sure how. Maybe I need special access rights? I created an account at least. Also, I see issues in github too. Which is the right place to log things? Thanks. On 02/08/2014 11:53 AM, Justin Karneges wrote: Here's an even simpler example using REQ/ROUTER: https://gist.github.com/jkarneges/1fa64e9763561f53daef It doesn't demonstrate the routing problem but it does demonstrate the identity binding oddity. You can see the ROUTER side that the envelope id is always the first id it has ever seen, even if the id printed by the REQ side is different every time. On 02/07/2014 02:33 PM, Justin Karneges wrote: Here's some small sample code to reproduce the issue: https://gist.github.com/jkarneges/ab2b1abea1ee4cfc1332 A (ztest1.py) creates REQ and ROUTER sockets. B (ztest2.py) creates REP and ROUTER sockets. B binds and provides a random identity to its ROUTER socket. A connects its sockets to B. A queries for B's id using the REQ socket, and then attempts to send a message via the ROUTER socket right after that. This is repeated every 2 seconds. A and B can be started in any order. A can be restarted and things will still work. If B is restarted, then A's ROUTER socket will never work again until A is restarted also. A uses ZMQ_ROUTER_MANDATORY to show that the failures are on A's side. On 02/07/2014 02:16 PM, Justin Karneges wrote: It is my understanding that being able to route requires the socket to have an identity mapping in its routing table for the peer. For peers that do not explicitly specify their own identity, then I believe you are correct that routing is not possible until at least one message has been received from the peer. It is at this point that the ROUTER socket will make up an identity for this peer and store it in its routing table. However, for peers that *do* explicitly specify their own identity (as I am doing), then this identity information is delivered immediately after the connection is established, allowing routing to the peer even if the peer has not sent a message yet. I should have been more clear in my original message. The B program is explicitly specifying a random UUID as the identity of its socket before binding. On 02/07/2014 02:06 PM, Panu Wetterstrand wrote: I did not quite get the problem but could this be because (I think) router is not able to route messages to socket from which it has not reveived data first... 7.2.2014 22.51 kirjoitti Justin Karneges jus...@affinix.com mailto:jus...@affinix.com mailto:jus...@affinix.com mailto:jus...@affinix.com: Hi, 1) ROUTER in program A is set to connect to a bind socket in program B. 2) Both programs are started, and the connection is established. 3) A determines B's socket identity out-of-band, and is able to send messages to B. 3) B is terminated and the connection is lost. 4) B is started again, and the connection is re-established. 5) A determines B's socket identity out-of-band, and is no longer able to send messages to B. It seems this problem does not happen if B retains the same socket identity across reconnects. However, if it uses a random identity (to be discovered out-of-band by A), then routing will never work again after the first restart of B. The A program must be restarted in order to make things right again. My guess is that
[zeromq-dev] Crash in zeromq 3.2.4 Windows x64
Hi List.
I’ve been using ZeroMQ for about 8 months and it has been working well for my
project. Recently I’ve noticed a crash on a customer site running under
moderately heavy use (this machine is communicating with about 850 active
clients, but the crash seems to happen over time, not based on how many clients
are connected at the time it happens). I didn’t get a full debug report because
it happened when I wasn’t directly monitoring the system and the process had to
be restarted because it is deployed in production. However, I have the call
stack where it happened:
Unhandled exception at 0x07FEFD0BBCCD (KernelBase.dll) in SmedgeMaster.exe:
0x4015: %hs (parameters: 0x004EF078).
KernelBase.dll!07fefd0bbccd() Unknown
SmedgeLib.dll!zmq::tune_tcp_socket(unsigned __int64)Unknown
SmedgeLib.dll!zmq::tcp_connecter_t::out_event(void) Unknown
SmedgeLib.dll!zmq::select_t::loop(void) Unknown
SmedgeLib.dll![thunk]:zmq::tcp_connecter_t::`vector deleting
destructor'`adjustor{504}' (unsigned int) Unknown
msvcr110.dll!_callthreadstartex() Line 354 C
msvcr110.dll!_threadstartex(void * ptd) Line 332C
kernel32.dll!76d5652d() Unknown
ntdll.dll!76e8c521()Unknown
The code is compiled Windows 64 bit on MSVC 11 (Visual Studio 2012). This is an
optimized release build with debugging info. I build zmq as a static library
that is linked into my own dynamic library. The thread in question is one of
the threads that is started by zmq itself, not my own library or code. I’m
afraid I didn’t get the exact instruction in the zmq code that triggered the
exception before I had to restart it (there was some panic as the process was
in the middle of a lot of work and clients were waiting!)
Does anyone have any idea what may be going on here? Is there some way I can
catch whatever is failing so I can handle it more gracefully than just killing
my entire process and potentially losing data? I’ve been having crashing like
this every few days of operation, but this is the first time I was even able to
get it to happen while the debugger was attached. I have the debugger attached
again after a restart, so if it happens again I may be able to get more
information, especially if someone can help me to know what I should be looking
for exactly.
Thank you for any insight you can provide.
-robin
Robin Scher
ro...@uberware.net
+1 (213) 448-0443
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
___
zeromq-dev mailing list
zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org
http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
Re: [zeromq-dev] Protocol Plugins
Well, large changes can always be grown incrementally. If we try a plugin architecture there's no reason to try to replace what we have now with new code. It can grow alongside it, without risk, then if/when it's mature, we use it. On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 7:45 PM, Lindley French lindl...@gmail.com wrote: I think it's a worthwhile goal. In fact, I think a lot of aspects of libzmq which are currently hard-coded should be made more modular. There are two issues: 1) It's a big task, as mentioned, and someone just has to do it. 2) As a big task, it's also a big stability risk. There's a greater potential to introduce bugs than there would be with smaller changes. On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Lyle Thompson lthomp...@ixiacom.com wrote: OK. Thanks for your feedback, Pieter. I think, then, that I will just do it the simple way. Regards, Lyle -Original Message- From: zeromq-dev-boun...@lists.zeromq.org [mailto:zeromq-dev-boun...@lists.zeromq.org] On Behalf Of Pieter Hintjens Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2014 12:30 AM To: ZeroMQ development list Subject: Re: [zeromq-dev] Protocol Plugins On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 3:05 AM, Lyle Thompson lthomp...@ixiacom.com wrote: I guess nobody is interested in pluggable protocols. Thanks anyway. Making pluggable protocols in the core library is just a very hard thing. It would require some major redesigns. People have added transports, and it's doable. They're not pluggable though, in the sense we usually mean. I built a simple framework for pluggable protocols over inproc bridges, some years ago: https://github.com/hintjens/vtx. It didn't get much attention. -Pieter ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
