On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 6:33 PM, Pieter Hintjens <[email protected]> wrote:
> zmq_term/zmq_init are an older deprecated API. We switched to a more > consistent model for the API in 3.2, so zmq_ctx_xxx for all methods > that work with contexts, like zmq_msg_xxx for all methods that work on > messages. > > zmq_ctx_destroy was the initial choice for the termination method. > However people pointed out that the context isn't actually destroyed, > it's terminated, so we added _term() as a synonym. To be honest I'm > not keen on _term() as it seems inconsistent for no benefit. We > destroy sockets and contexts asynchronously... I'd prefer _destroy(). > > > More usefully, we later added _shutdown() method that stops the > context but leaves it in existence; this allows a two-stage shutdown, > with signals being sent to all sockets waiting on blocking operations, > and then allowing the app to call zmq_ctx_destroy/term when wanted. > > So is it a better idea to first call _shutdown() and then _destroy()? Or rather _term() as _destroy() looks like it will be deprecated in the next stable release? > -Pieter > > On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 3:34 PM, Indradhanush Gupta > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I consulted the docs for zmq_ctx_term and zmq_ctx_destroy, in the API > > version 4.0 and it appears to be both have the same description. What is > the > > difference between the two? > > I'm using pyzmq, by the way. > > > > When I called zmq.Context.term() the call blocks indefinitely, while > > zmq.Context.destroy() returns immediately. I am shutting down my IOLoop, > > then closing all open sockets by hand and only then calling one of the > > above. > > > > What is the difference between the two calls? Also, it appears > > zmq_ctx_destroy is going to be deprecated according to the 4.1 dev API > docs. > > Why is term() blocking while destroy() doesn't? > > > > I'm also confused as to when should I call shutdown, destroy or term? > > > > If it helps, I have not set any LINGER option on any of the sockets. > > > > Thanks, > > -- > > Indradhanush Gupta > > (dhanush on irc) > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > -- Indradhanush Gupta
_______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
