If you read the replies on the SO question, you will find lots of people refuting the "UDP is faster" mantra.
If you haven't already benchmarked Storm to determine the latency and if you are thinking that you might want to use Python for message handling, then you have already given up far more than what TCP might cost you. The simple act of marshaling a tuple is going to cost more than the difference in many cases. On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 8:14 PM, joe roberts <[email protected]> wrote: > Based on this articles, it is. > > http://gafferongames.com/networking-for-game-programmers/udp-vs-tcp/ > > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/47903/udp-vs-tcp-how-much-faster-is-it > > http://www.diffen.com/difference/TCP_vs_UDP > > http://www.skullbox.net/tcpudp.php. > > The real-time game server that I am writing has use cases where some > packet loss is acceptable, and some cases where reliable messages are > needed (UDT), so for my particular use-cases, it is. As I understand it, > Netty offers, UDP, UDT, and TCP classes, therefore, it provides what I need. > > On 6/8/2014 11:07 PM, Ted Dunning wrote: > > > Why do you think that UDP is faster? > > > > > On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 6:27 PM, joe roberts <[email protected] > > wrote: > >> To make it faster! >> >> >> On 6/8/2014 8:27 PM, Ted Dunning wrote: >> >> >> On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 12:12 PM, joe roberts < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Also, it seems Storm uses TCP via ZeroMQ by default -Is that right? And >>> if so, can it be switched to use UDP or UDT instead, perhaps by replacing >>> ZeroMQ with Netty? >>> >> >> Why would you want that? >> >> >> >> > >
