On Jan 18, 2012, at 7:41 AM, Dorin Ciobanu (dciobanu) wrote: > Hi! > > Can anybody please let me know about the level of support for ZMQ_PAIR > sockets in ZMQ 3.0? > In 2.x they don’t support auto-reconnect and occasionally I’d get asserts > (probably because of that).
ZMQ_PAIR sockets don't really fit in to the zeromq philosophy. Including them at all was probably a mistake. There are a few (minor) use-cases for ZMQ_PAIR, but in most situations where you would use one a regular BSD socket is probably appropriate. They are generally used for signaling between threads in which case a DEALER/ROUTER pair is just as useful (or a DEALER/DEALER pair). I would expect that in the future, ZMQ_PAIR will be dropped. > Also I’m interested in IPC transport on Windows. Could you please tell me (or > direct me to an URL that google didn’t find for me) where the current state > and future plans are? If you search the archives for this list, you should find a few discussions on this topic. If memory serves, we have had 2 or 3 people tackle the creation of Windows IPC but no code has ever really made it back into zeromq. Apparently the Windows mechanisms for asynchronous delivery of data via named pipes is not a very good fit for zeromq's internal architecture. The lead developer (Martin Sustrik) is also more of a UNIX guy than a Windows guy so, unless there is some strong incentive for him to work on it, I think this contribution will have to come from a community member. Perhaps one of the people working on this code can speak up. We would all appreciate an update on their progress even if it's just "I gave up but here's why." > Hopefully it’s the right place to ask. Yep, this is the right place! cr _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
