On 07/02/2012, at 9:15 PM, Staffan Gimåker wrote: >> 2) one pair for each thread w/o synchronization >> How much better will 2) compare to 1)?Is it worth the complexity? > > If ZeroMQ is the bottleneck, i.e. not the data source itself, then 2) > will fare better, for two reasons: > > * No synchronization.
It's not true there is no synchronisation, it just isn't explicit in the user code. You can't send data from one thread to another by any means without some kind of barrier to synchronise the caches. -- john skaller [email protected] _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
