Re: Part-time Perl Developer Position based Reading, UK (etc.)
Yep, *good* remote jobs are hard to come by, but family life is important for some of us, so it's worth keeping up the hunt. I'm just finishing (hint) one remote contract which happens to be close to where I live in Munich. I walked from my last job when they said I had to come in for a half-hour stand-up meeting every day, even when the original deal was 60/40 onsite/offsite and (rarely but) occassionally it took me 2.5 (yes, two and a half) hours to drive to work through the traffic jams. They looked vaguely surprised at the time, but it all worked out for the best in the end. I look back with fond memories on that contract where I "pressed the flesh" on the first day, and then never saw the people again, and worked remotely for a full year. Interesting work too. Ciao Richard -- Richard Foley Ciao - shorter than AufWiederSehen! http://www.rfi.net/books.html > >> For a part-time job, I would expect the advert to say how many > >> hours/days per week are involved. > > > > When hours/days are not mentioned I assume they want a small number of > > odd hours and some on-call stuff - without having to pay a FT staffer > > an on-call bonus :-/ > > Personally I'd love a job like that, as long as it was all on a working > from home basis. Which they rarely are. :'( > > /Really/ fed up with commuting this week.
Re: ActiveMQ (was Re: Devel::Cover with Moose?)
On 24 May 2011 19:53, Toby Wintermute wrote: > On 24 May 2011 15:18, Toby Wintermute wrote: >> On 23 May 2011 21:07, Peter Edwards wrote: >>> Back to fighting with ActiveMQ. Feh. >> >> By the way.. how are you finding ActiveMQ, especially when interacting >> with it from Perl? > > Answering my own question a bit here, but I have now used ActiveMQ > with Perl via the STOMP interface to ActiveMQ. > > 1) I've already had to file two bugs with patches to AnyEvent::STOMP, > as it simply didn't work at all. This is possibly due to a stricter > parsing of STOMP by ActiveMQ than others.. I'm not sure. > It doesn't give me much confidence that anyone else is working with > both ActiveMQ and this CPAN module though! > > 2) The ACK system seems to be ignored by ActiveMQ. > I set "ACK"s to be manual, and then I am only sending ACKs for 50% of > the messages I receive. > I am setting the Receipt header in messages I send. > > So, I expect that either > a) I will not receipt RECEIPTs for things I didn't ACK, or > b) The broker will resend messages that I failed to ACK. > > Neither of these happen. > I receive RECEIPTs for every message sent, and un-ACKed messages are > not requeued. > > Is that meant to happen? Quickly updating this -- further investigation shows that ActiveMQ's behaviour is to take any ACK to mean you're acknowledging everything sent so far. If you don't ACK anything, or the recent things, then it'll happily store and resend them. So if I receive 10 messages, and sent ACKs for none except the last, then all are considered good by activemq. Nothing will be requeued. If I receive 10 messages, and send ACKs for, say, #8, but not #9 or #10, then activemq will consider the first 8 as good, and requeue and resend the ninth and tenth. So if you're using ACKs to indicate that you haven't totally crashed while processing a message, then the system will work as you expect.. if you crash and reconnect, you'll receive the last message again. This is a bit annoying if you're writing an asynchronous consumer with AnyEvent::STOMP though, because you could conceivably receive 3 messages and be processing them simultaneously.. finish #3 first and ACK it, then crash out before finishing #1 and #2. But because you ACKed #3, ActiveMQ considers 1 and 2 as fine too :( Note that I am a newbie at AMQ so it's possible there's some sort of option floating around to change this that I just haven't found yet.. -Toby
Re: GTUG's
On 25 May 2011 00:24, Dave Hodgkinson wrote: > On 24 May 2011, at 06:22, Toby Wintermute wrote: >> On 7 May 2011 22:15, Dave Hodgkinson wrote: >>> Anyone know anything about this? >>> >>> http://www.gtugs.org/ >> >> I joined up and went to a few GTUG meetings, but then they seemed to >> run out of content/presenters.. Or maybe the guy running it in >> Melbourne just lost interest or was too busy.. I don't know. >> >> What did you want to know about? > > More about networking. And ultimately having a source of talent to > draw on :) Yeah, I'd say it would be useful for networking. Although there can be a lot of people who are all about the "google reselling & support" rather than development.. but also people who are into development. See how you go? Toby -- Turning and turning in the widening gyre The falcon cannot hear the falconer Things fall apart; the center cannot hold Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world
Re: Part-time Perl Developer Position based Reading, UK
On 24 May 2011, at 09:42, Victoria Conlan wrote: > >>> For a part-time job, I would expect the advert to say how many >>> hours/days per week are involved. >> When hours/days are not mentioned I assume they want a small number of >> odd hours and some on-call stuff - without having to pay a FT staffer >> an on-call bonus :-/ > > Personally I'd love a job like that, as long as it was all on a working from > home basis. Which they rarely are. :'( > Fingers crossed, I'll be hiring shortly. Currently have one guy up a mountain in Bulgaria and may have one in Berlin.
Re: GTUG's
On 24 May 2011, at 06:22, Toby Wintermute wrote: > On 7 May 2011 22:15, Dave Hodgkinson wrote: >> Anyone know anything about this? >> >> http://www.gtugs.org/ > > I joined up and went to a few GTUG meetings, but then they seemed to > run out of content/presenters.. Or maybe the guy running it in > Melbourne just lost interest or was too busy.. I don't know. > > What did you want to know about? More about networking. And ultimately having a source of talent to draw on :)
Re: ActiveMQ (was Re: Devel::Cover with Moose?)
Actually we are running ActiveMQ 5.4.0 in production although latest is 5.4.2 on that branch and 5.5.0 is now also available. http://activemq.apache.org/ https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12311210&version=12315623 Yet more "Java leaking memory" bugfixes by the look of it :-) -Peter
Re: ActiveMQ (was Re: Devel::Cover with Moose?)
On 24 May 2011, at 06:18, Toby Wintermute wrote: > On 23 May 2011 21:07, Peter Edwards wrote: >> Back to fighting with ActiveMQ. Feh. > By the way.. how are you finding ActiveMQ, especially when interacting > with it from Perl? AFAICS, it seems to work best through the STOMP support. Net::Stomp is a bit funky, but I've wrapped it into something that doesn't have a multi-stage setup process and thus can be glued into Catalyst with Catalyst::Model::Adaptor. It sprouted serialisation and deserialisation of messages and tracing (set STOMP_TRACE in the environment to have the messages dumped). At some point I should tidy up the tests and docs and shove it on CPAN. Any idea what name I should give it? (Net::Stomp::Simple? It uses Moose so it's not terribly ::Lite.) > I've been recommended to use it for a project at work, but I don't > think the recommender has actually used it. Curious to know how it > works in the real world. Being software, it is of course hateful, but I've found it to be the least-worst of all of the message-queue systems I've tried. I made a Debian (therefore also Ubuntu) package for it which took a whole load of arsing around away.
Re: ActiveMQ (was Re: Devel::Cover with Moose?)
> > By the way.. how are you finding ActiveMQ, especially when interacting > > with it from Perl? > > I'm using it from Net::Stomp which had issues but now (version 0.40 on) works fine for us. Historically, ActiveMQ had problems with memory leaks though 5.3 works fine for us. It is also the standard queue platform used more widely within the BBC. One thing to watch out for is if you use non-persistent queues and don't consume the messages eventually the server runs out of memory and at that point (rather bizarrely IMO) still accepts TCP/IP connections but blocks responding to requests. You do see messages in its log, though. IIRC some people have had problems with high volume sites when the message packet is over 2K and occasionally frames get dropped (so use a smaller payload). We're using it in a fairly simplistic way, I write to a queue to notify publishing events (start and finish) and we also wrote a node.js http://nodejs.org/ pub-sub hub which picks those up using https://github.com/benjaminws/stomp-js and re-broadcasts by cometd to web clients (in addition to handling other client-server notifications and messaging). Seems to work okay. The JS code with node turned out to be straightforward and easier to implement a FSA than say writing a Perl POE server. Regards, Peter http://perl.dragonstaff.co.uk
Re: ActiveMQ (was Re: Devel::Cover with Moose?)
On 24 May 2011 15:18, Toby Wintermute wrote: > On 23 May 2011 21:07, Peter Edwards wrote: >> Back to fighting with ActiveMQ. Feh. > > By the way.. how are you finding ActiveMQ, especially when interacting > with it from Perl? Answering my own question a bit here, but I have now used ActiveMQ with Perl via the STOMP interface to ActiveMQ. 1) I've already had to file two bugs with patches to AnyEvent::STOMP, as it simply didn't work at all. This is possibly due to a stricter parsing of STOMP by ActiveMQ than others.. I'm not sure. It doesn't give me much confidence that anyone else is working with both ActiveMQ and this CPAN module though! 2) The ACK system seems to be ignored by ActiveMQ. I set "ACK"s to be manual, and then I am only sending ACKs for 50% of the messages I receive. I am setting the Receipt header in messages I send. So, I expect that either a) I will not receipt RECEIPTs for things I didn't ACK, or b) The broker will resend messages that I failed to ACK. Neither of these happen. I receive RECEIPTs for every message sent, and un-ACKed messages are not requeued. Is that meant to happen? Cheers, Toby
Re: Part-time Perl Developer Position based Reading, UK
For a part-time job, I would expect the advert to say how many hours/days per week are involved. When hours/days are not mentioned I assume they want a small number of odd hours and some on-call stuff - without having to pay a FT staffer an on-call bonus :-/ Personally I'd love a job like that, as long as it was all on a working from home basis. Which they rarely are. :'( /Really/ fed up with commuting this week.
