Hi all,
I'd like to thank all those who came to Brussels for the meeting
yesterday. It was a small, constructive, focussed group.
Despite the lack of a structured agenda we covered pretty much every
area. We'll put up a wiki page with a summary of what was discussed
and agreed.
The first
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 8:36 AM, Pieter Hintjens p...@imatix.com wrote:
Thanks again to all who came, it was a long day yesterday but really
satisfying.
Hi,
thank you for organising the event. We couldn't have made it through
the day without the croissants you got from the bakery at 6am.
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 8:36 AM, Pieter Hintjens p...@imatix.com wrote:
Thanks again to all who came, it was a long day yesterday but really
satisfying.
Yep, very enjoyable day, thanks for organising Peter, and to everyone that
came along. Had a good train back reading the John Day book
Hi Steven,
thanks, it was indeed sth with my debian libc version. The same code runs fine
on different machine with ubuntu.
Sincerely
Azamat
--- On Tue, 5/10/11, Steven McCoy steven.mc...@miru.hk wrote:
From: Steven McCoy steven.mc...@miru.hk
Subject: Re: [zeromq-dev] Invalid argument
Hi!
I've started to learn zmq by compiling and running tests (remote_thr and
local_thr) to see amount of data I can utilize.
I've run applications (without any modifications) on 2 remote hosts in 1
Gbit network over tcp transport.
Results was about 10 Mbit/sec, no matter of message size I used
Hello!
According to zmq_msg_init_data manual
==
int zmq_msg_init_data (zmq_msg_t *msg, void *data, size_t size,
zmq_free_fn *ffn, void *hint);
==
ffn is optional (If provided, the deallocation function ffn shall be called
once the data buffer is no longer required by 0MQ).
How does the
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 15:38, Ilja Golshtein ilej...@narod.ru wrote:
According to zmq_msg_init_data manual
==
int zmq_msg_init_data (zmq_msg_t *msg, void *data, size_t size,
zmq_free_fn *ffn, void *hint);
==
ffn is optional (If provided, the deallocation function ffn shall be called
Hi all,
Let me say first that I'm a newb, but that I *kinda* feel like I've grokked
ZeroMQ. I'm working on a real-time vision system and we're using ZeroMQ to
connect its major computational components. My review so far: ZeroMQ is awesome!
There are a number of design issues that I'd like help
Hi Brian,
I had problems with pub-sub and hwm as well. The behaviour I was seeing was
that despite the hwm messages were queued to publisher side and with large
message size the memory usage sky rocketed within seconds after subscriber died.
I tested this with simple cpp code and could not
2011/5/11 Dirkjan Ochtman dirk...@ochtman.nl:
Is the code
==
zmq_msg_t msg;
zmq_msg_init_data (msg, (void *)something, 9, NULL, NULL);
==
valid?
I think in this case something is allocated on the stack.
It's more likely that it will be kept in read-only data section, not on stack.
Although the note about stack is technically correct, the behaviour is
undefined from C programming language standpoint.
I think it must be clearly stated the lifetime of the data must be controlled.
In fact it must be kept until zeromq context closed, isn't it?
In zguide the zmq_msg_init_data
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 3:46 PM, Brian Rossa rossa...@hotmail.com wrote:
My understanding of the HWM semantic is that, when the HWM is reached, new
messages will not be queued. That means that the queued messages are not the
newest messages. There are good reasons for why this has to be the
Ian,
I was concerned that this might be the case but -- and these results are highly
preliminary -- switching to ipc:// sockets doesn't seem to solve the problem.
Still working on a demonstration.
Cheers!~br
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 16:27:37 +0100
From: ian.bar...@gmail.com
To:
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Brian Rossa rossa...@hotmail.com wrote:
Ian,
I was concerned that this might be the case but -- and these results are
highly preliminary -- switching to ipc:// sockets doesn't seem to solve the
problem.
Still working on a demonstration.
Cheers!
~br
There is a buffer in IPC as well I believe - so it is possible that's coming
into play. Do you have HWM set on both sides or just on one?
Both sides.
Cheers! ~br ___
zeromq-dev mailing list
2011/5/11 Геннадий Казачёк gena.kazac...@gmail.com:
I've started to learn zmq by compiling and running tests (remote_thr and
local_thr) to see amount of data I can utilize.
I've run applications (without any modifications) on 2 remote hosts in 1
Gbit network over tcp transport.
Results was
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Brian Rossa rossa...@hotmail.com wrote:
There are a number of design issues that I'd like help with in the medium
term. For now, though, there's one that needs some urgent attention:
*apparent* queuing of messages on PUB/SUB fan-in despite having HWM set to 1
2011/5/11 Ilja Golshtein ilej...@narod.ru:
In zguide the zmq_msg_init_data syntax with zero ffn is used a couple of
times, though I failed to find if it is explained
why it is wrong or at least dangerous.
I removed all these examples from the guide because they were very
misleading. The
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 18:25, Pieter Hintjens p...@imatix.com wrote:
Did you set the HWM _before_ connecting and binding? If you set it
afterwards, it has no effect. (Rather, it has effect only on future
binds and connects).
Heh. Can we make that assert in some next release?
Cheers,
Dirkjan
While the latency tests using the c# bindings appear consistent on my laptop
(around 300 [us]) the throughput tests have a fairly large drop off when # of
messages are increased.
C:\software\zeromq-clrzmq2-f420936\local_thr\bin\Releaselocal_thr.exe
tcp://*: 120 3
Your average
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman dirk...@ochtman.nl wrote:
Heh. Can we make that assert in some next release?
Cheers,
Dirkjan
I thought about chucking an error in that case on the PHP binding (even sent
Mikko a misguided patch), but there's no way of knowing whether someone
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 6:36 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman dirk...@ochtman.nl wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 18:25, Pieter Hintjens p...@imatix.com wrote:
Did you set the HWM _before_ connecting and binding? If you set it
afterwards, it has no effect. (Rather, it has effect only on future
binds and
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 6:38 PM, Christian Martinez ch...@microsoft.com wrote:
While the latency tests using the c# bindings appear consistent on my laptop
(around 300 [us]) the throughput tests have a fairly large drop off when #
of messages are increased.
30K messages isn't meaningful. You
Here's tests that take the range of time. Tried 3M but got an out of memory
error on client side
C:\software\zeromq-clrzmq2-f420936\local_thr\bin\Releaselocal_thr.exe
tcp://*: 120 200
Your average throughput is 75325 [msg/s]
Your average throughput is 72 [Mb/s]
Just out of curiosity: Which platform? And are you building with
optimizations turned on (i.e. release)?
Anton
2011/5/11 Pieter Hintjens p...@imatix.com
2011/5/11 Геннадий Казачёк gena.kazac...@gmail.com:
I've started to learn zmq by compiling and running tests (remote_thr and
local_thr)
Running tests back to back on same laptop back to back sending 1000
messages.
C:\software\zeromq-clrzmq2-f420936\remote_thr\bin\Releaseremote_thr.exe
tcp://127.0.0.1: 120 1000
C:\software\zeromq-clrzmq2-f420936\remote_thr\bin\Releaseremote_thr.exe
tcp://127.0.0.1: 120 1000
I'm not sure what you are seeing here are my test runs...
E:\zmqwin32remote_thr.exe tcp://127.0.0.1: 120 1000
E:\zmqwin32remote_thr.exe tcp://127.0.0.1: 120 1000
E:\zmqwin32local_thr.exe tcp://127.0.0.1: 120 1000
message size: 120 [B]
message count: 1000
mean
Hmm.. Are you using clrzmq2http://github.com/zeromq/clrzmq2?
Built libzmq 2.1.6 by opening sln and just doing rebuild all.. System info below
OS Name Microsoft Windows 7 Enterprise
Version6.1.7601 Service Pack 1 Build 7601
System ManufacturerHewlett-Packard
System
Martin,
Looking at the next generation of the 0MQ wire level protocol, I think
the latest websocket framing spec would make a good fit for the base
framing layer. There are several advantages to tracking websockets on
this, if it's possible.
+1 on that idea.
Getting the WS bytes directly to/from clients and channeling that into a
message bus would be great.
On May 11, 2011, at 3:01 PM, Pieter Hintjens wrote:
Martin,
Looking at the next generation of the 0MQ wire level protocol, I think
the latest websocket framing spec would
So guys, I have some evidence for my claims. I can give it to you in any
combination of the following ways:
1) Python code and a shell script that implements a PUB/SUB connection pattern
similar to mine where intermediate nodes introduce realistic processing
delays2) Data (CSV files) generated
On 12 May 2011 00:01, Pieter Hintjens p...@imatix.com wrote:
Martin,
Looking at the next generation of the 0MQ wire level protocol, I think
the latest websocket framing spec would make a good fit for the base
framing layer. There are several advantages to tracking websockets on
this, if
Lots of warnings in the compile about possible loss of data but the tests are
running great.
Is this a tested scenario? Do I need to dig into each warning?
--CM
___
zeromq-dev mailing list
zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org
The basic problem is that the remote is producing messages faster than the
consumer (local). This is a common problem in messaging systems and if left
unchecked will kill the queue. ZeroMQ has a few ways to help with the problem.
The first is the HWM (High Water Mark). Once the HWM is reached,
On 12 May 2011 08:30, Christian Martinez ch...@microsoft.com wrote:
Lots of warnings in the compile about possible loss of data but the tests
are running great.
Is this a tested scenario? Do I need to dig into each warning?
Depends on the compiler, the platform, and what you are
Heh. Your guess is correct!
Followed the note on the site about how to build for x64 and just went with it.
So far so good but was just wondering if anyone hit any snags.
--CM
From: zeromq-dev-boun...@lists.zeromq.org
[mailto:zeromq-dev-boun...@lists.zeromq.org] On Behalf Of Steven McCoy
36 matches
Mail list logo
