I don't think any of the designs would put a router at the worker side, it is an option at the server side. On Nov 15, 2012 3:51 PM, "Ilja Golshtein" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yes, > > so the statement "This would require that workers start by telling the > server they exist" > is incorrect because we have Router at workers' side. > > 15.11.2012, 10:37, "Pieter Hintjens" <[email protected]>: > > If you use a DEALER/ROUTER connect then the dealer has to connect to > > the router before the router can reply to it. That's the > > load-balancing pattern already explained. > > > > -Pieter > > > > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 3:35 PM, Ilja Golshtein <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> Pieter, > >> > >> my question is if the description of > >> what should be changed to switch > >> from DEALER/DEALER to DEALER/ROUTER > >> correct. > >> > >> 15.11.2012, 03:20, "Pieter Hintjens" <[email protected]>: > >>> Ilja, > >>> > >>> Correction, the text is right, though perhaps confusing. It explains > >>> two options (router-dealer, dealer-dealer), and then explains why we > >>> chose dealer-dealer in this case. > >>> > >>> -Pieter > >>> > >>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Pieter Hintjens <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>>> You're right, the text is wrong. The server and workers talk using > >>>> DEALER-to-DEALER. I'll fix the text, thanks for catching this. > >>>> > >>>> -Pieter > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 1:10 AM, Ilja Golshtein <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>>>> Hello, > >>>>> Pieter, > >>>>> All. > >>>>> > >>>>> In ZGuide in "The Asynchronous Client-Server Pattern" section we > have > >>>>> == > >>>>> Workers get unaddressed messages, and we manage the connections > from server thread to worker threads explicitly using a ROUTER socket as > backend. This would require that workers start by telling the server they > exist, which can then route requests to workers and track which client is > 'connected' to which worker. This is the load-balancing pattern again. > >>>>> == > >>>>> > >>>>> Since we are talking about Routers at workers' side, I am not sure > why "This would require that workers start by telling the server they > exist". > >>>>> It is server who should start a communication and he does it > anyway. > >>>>> > >>>>> Actually switching from DEALER to ROUTER at worker's side requires > reading and writing extra frame, which is identity. > >>>>> > >>>>> Do I miss something? > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks. > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> Best regards > >>>>> Ilja Golshtein > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> zeromq-dev mailing list > >>>>> [email protected] > >>>>> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> zeromq-dev mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > >> -- > >> Best regards > >> Ilja Golshtein > >> _______________________________________________ > >> zeromq-dev mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > > zeromq-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > > -- > Best regards > Ilja Golshtein > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev >
_______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
