Why don't you set a timeout for asynchronous ACKs? You receive ACKs asynchronously and keep associated messages until ACKs come or a timeout occurs. A timeout of 20 seconds is a reasonable estimate. After a timeout, if a message doesn't have a corresponding ACK, it is determined that the message wasn't delievered, and the message is sent again or discarded.
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 3:19 AM, artemv zmq <[email protected]> wrote: > 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
