"we don't care if message will get lost on a network" + "we don't need
guarantee deliveri"
isn't it contradictory with:
"for every single message how to know : whether it was delivered or not"
Probably PUB/SUB is what your architect is looking for.
Le 05/12/2013 19:25, artemv zmq a écrit :
I personally has been thinking about next solution:
- message sender sets send_hwm=0. And that's it. But problem is that
socket.send() returns "true" even if I send to unexisting peer.
2013/12/5 artemv zmq <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
Hi,
My name is Artem. I stay with ZMQ (on java) a year or so. Got a
cool question for you, ppl!
Here's my story. Recently I entered a new company (gambling
games), after working few weeks, after getting accustomed with a
code, I found that they are building
very-unnecessarly-complex-distibuted-application ... I was
unhappy few days, because couldn't even imagine how to support ALL
THAT CRAP in an upcoming future. So I suggested ZMQ hoping that
ZMQ will "open eyes" to others. But, as a feedback I got one big
fundamental concern (from chief architects):
- we have to know only one thing about every message: it has been
delivered onto remote peer or not
And few additional comments:
-we don't care if message will get lost on a network
- we don't need guarantee deliveri
- no RPC / everything is asynchronous
- we don't need HWM
So I'm here, because I really can't address this question: "for
every single message how to know : whether it was delivered or not" .
Thanks in advance. And appreciate for your help.
_______________________________________________
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
