Hi Ilja, On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 11:44 AM, Ilja Golshtein <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Paul. > > Although your description is not complete of course, > my choice is somewhere near (2) although I understand your grief > about extra complexity. > And what tools do you use? Are you happy node.js or tornado user?
> It is terrible to block threads waiting for response from another > box (and I'd say from another process) in most production alike cases. > Even if timeout exists. > Ah, well, most today's database wrappers are synchronous. And databases are almost always separate processes, and usually on separate boxes. Similarly there are various problems with different asynchronous frameworks, biggest one is probably unreadable code. So in perfect world you would probably be right, but there are not so many tools to do it right now. > It would be great to delegate all (or some) further processing to another > cluster > instead of waiting. > One good alternate we use sometimes is just push data from A to B and wait for another push from B to A (and it can be wrapped around request reply if needed). This works for some stuff, but there are a lot of cases where we should hold a lock or keep some complex state while doing request. -- Paul _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
