Hi Trevor, thank you for the info about the performance ... good to know. Unfortunately the multicast is quite important for us too.
Kind regards, Petr On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 6:44 PM, Trevor Bernard <[email protected]> wrote: > > thank you for the recommendation of JeroMQ - we were using it so far and > it > > is definitely a very nice project I have to say. But for our upcoming > > project we need the best performance we can get and probably a multicast > > too. These are the reasons why we are "forced" to use JZMQ ... > > From my performance tests, JeroMQ has higher throughput and lower > latency than JZMQ. This has to do with the fact that crossing the JNI > boundary and working with byte arrays are expensive. I agree with > Benjamin, if you don't need security, domain sockets or multicat, > there is no reason to be to choose JZMQ over JeroMQ. Performance use > to be another one but it's no longer the case. > _______________________________________________ > 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
