> On Jun 24, 2020, at 12:16 PM, Serguei Khasimkhanov <serk...@hotmail.com> > wrote: > > > Thank you for the answers. I will reply to everyone in this email: > > > > BJovke: You can send a pointer to your shared_ptr and then the receiver > > should copy construct (it's not an actual copy but a reference) it's own > > shared_ptr from it and forget about this pointer. > > But the problem is that the original shared pointer may get destroyed or > replaced before the receiver can make a copy. > > > > Rodrigo: If you can change the class definition, you could use the seldom > > seen std::enable_shared_from_this. > > If I send a pointer to the object, and the original shared_ptr to the object > goes out of scope, the object will be destroyed, and I won't be able to > `std::enable_shared_from_this`. > > > > Sergei: You should serialize your object on publisher side -> send -> > > receive -> deserialize on subscriber. By object I mean target object on > > which shared_ptr points. > > If I serialize a shared_ptr, it won't get copy-constructed, so the reference > count won't increase, and the owned pointer could get freed before any > receivers receive the message. > > > > Rafal: Don't you think that sending a pointer to a memory is very error > > prone? e.g.: object may be destroyed before the receiver gets a serialized > > copy of shared_ptr as ref_count will not consider the fact that there is an > > instance of pointer in the ZMQ inproc buffer. IMO it would be better to > > send an object identifier which could be used by a receiver to retrieve > > data from some data provider. > > Yes that's what I'm worried about. I don't know when to delete the pointer > because I don't know when everyone is done using it. That data provider idea > is my backup plan - if a receiver wants a copy of the data, they send a > separate data request to the publisher (through a separate socket), and the > publisher sends each one a properly-constructed copy of the std::shared_ptr. >
I have code which has done this. As has been pointed out, this is tricky as you need to ensure the lifetime of the thing being pointed to until the receiver has received the message and taken ownership of the shared reference. The way I ended up managing it was storing the shared_ptr in a table hashed by the pointer value (each hash bucket having it’s own mutex to reduce contention) and then sending the pointer value over the inproc socket as a key into the table. Retrieving the key then moves the shared_ptr out of the table so that the receiver has ownership of the shared_ptr ref. > > > Bill: Your original question implies (but does not state explicitly) that > > you want to use 0mq to send shared_ptr’s to other threads in the same > > process. If that is the case you need to be cognizant of > > (https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/memory/shared_ptr): > > Sorry for the confusion, yes it is all the same process. My goal is to have > each subscriber to copy-construct their own copy of the shared_ptr. > > > > Harald: shared_pointers are thread safe (not the underlying data). so you > > can copy the shared_ptr to the thread, read the date, and forget about it. > > no need to try some tricks like serialize pointer addresses, you will not > > succeed that way anyway. > > The problem is, I cannot just "copy the shared_ptr and forget about it". If > it goes out of scope before any subscribers make a copy, its data will be > deallocated. > > > From: zeromq-dev <zeromq-dev-boun...@lists.zeromq.org> on behalf of Harald > Achitz <harald.ach...@gmail.com> > Sent: June 24, 2020 2:36 PM > To: ZeroMQ development list <zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org> > Subject: Re: [zeromq-dev] ZMQ - Send std::shared_ptr via inproc pub-sub? > > shared_pointers are thread safe (not the underlying data) > so you can copy the shared_ptr to the thread, read the date, and forget about > it > no need to try some tricks like serialize pointer addresses, you will not > succeed that way anyway > >> On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 at 20:25, Bill Torpey <wallstp...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Serguei: >> >> Your original question implies (but does not state explicitly) that you want >> to use 0mq to send shared_ptr’s to other threads in the same process. If >> that is the case you need to be cognizant of >> (https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/memory/shared_ptr): >> >> The ownership of an object can only be shared with another shared_ptr by >> copy constructing or copy assigning its value to another shared_ptr. >> Constructing a new shared_ptr using the raw underlying pointer owned by >> another shared_ptr leads to undefined behavior. > > > > If that is not the case (i.e., if the destination of the send is not another > thread in the same process), you need to actually serialize the data, as > suggested by Sergei Nikulov <sergey.niku...@gmail.com> > > Which is it? > > B > >> On Jun 24, 2020, at 2:06 PM, Rafał Dudycz <rafal.dud...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> Don't you think that sending a pointer to a memory is very error prone? >> e.g.: object may be destroyed before the receiver gets a serialized copy of >> shared_ptr as ref_count will not consider the fact that there is an instance >> of pointer in the ZMQ inproc buffer. >> IMO it would be better to send an object identifier which could be used by a >> receiver to retrieve data from some data provider. >> >> -- >> Rafal >> >> >> śr., 24 cze 2020 o 19:56 Sergei Nikulov <sergey.niku...@gmail.com> >> napisał(a): >> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 8:11 PM Serguei Khasimkhanov >> <serk...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Hello all, >> > >> > I have a publisher thread that has a bunch of shared_ptrs to large chunks >> > of data. Occasionally I want to share some of those shared_ptrs with >> > subscribers (for read-only.) The problem is that ZeroMQ only allows >> > sending binary data, not C++ objects. How can I accomplish this? >> >> You should serialize your object on publisher side -> send -> receive >> -> deserialize on subscriber. >> There is no other way except you doing some interprocess communication. >> Ref. https://www.google.com/search?q=c%2B%2B+serialization >> >> > >> > I was thinking I could allocate a copy of the shared_ptr on the heap, then >> > publish a pointer to it, but since I don't know when the subscribers are >> > done using that pointer, I don't know when to deallocate it. >> > >> > - Ser >> > _______________________________________________ >> > zeromq-dev mailing list >> > zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org >> > https://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev >> >> >> >> -- >> Best Regards, >> Sergei Nikulov >> _______________________________________________ >> zeromq-dev mailing list >> zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org >> https://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev >> _______________________________________________ >> zeromq-dev mailing list >> zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org >> https://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org > https://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org > https://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
_______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org https://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
