A lot of this is 2.x stuff and no longer relevant. Still, it's very nice to see people explore this space.
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 8:50 PM, Steven McCoy <[email protected]> wrote: > On 23 August 2013 14:37, Steven McCoy <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On very small (<40 byte) TCP messages and inproc messages, ZeroMQ is >> faster (30-40%) than Nitro; Nitro's use of mutex/cond on socket queues >> probably costs it there. > > I'm seeing atypical pthread mutex usage in the code-base, it is trivial to > optimise with an adaptive mutex and further improvements are usually > available with members of the spin lock family. > > -- > Steve-o > > _______________________________________________ > 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
