Re: [zeromq-dev] Image server and client

2013-02-09 Thread Pieter Hintjens
Hi Christoph, Your project sounds nice, and should be fun with 0MQ. In general, start small, be prepared to throw away your early experiments, and try to spend the time to learn the patterns explained in the Guide, and you will succeed. -Pieter On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Christoph Heindl

Re: [zeromq-dev] Assertion failed: check () (msg.cpp:207)

2013-02-09 Thread Alexander Schumskich
Also, inserting "sleep(1)" between the message sends at the client side seems to avoid this problem. Am Samstag, 9. Februar 2013 18:05:06 UTC+1 schrieb Alexander Schumskich: > > I have a C application talking to a java server over zeromq / protobuf. > The server is pretty mucht he same as in the

Re: [zeromq-dev] Assertion failed: check () (msg.cpp:207)

2013-02-09 Thread Alexander Schumskich
I forgot to mention, I use zmq version 3.2.2. Am Samstag, 9. Februar 2013 18:05:06 UTC+1 schrieb Alexander Schumskich: > > I have a C application talking to a java server over zeromq / protobuf. > The server is pretty mucht he same as in the examples ( > https://github.com/imatix/zguide/blob/mas

[zeromq-dev] Assertion failed: check () (msg.cpp:207)

2013-02-09 Thread Alexander Schumskich
I have a C application talking to a java server over zeromq / protobuf. The server is pretty mucht he same as in the examples ( https://github.com/imatix/zguide/blob/master/examples/Java/asyncsrv.java ) but the client is a C client. I use windows 8 / MinGW. The communication runs well for a whil

Re: [zeromq-dev] PyZMQ 13.0.0rc1

2013-02-09 Thread MinRK
Some more build fixes for RC2: pip install https://dl.dropbox.com/sh/nsww1t3adru9p3o/E1p1gyK8eG/pyzmq-13.0.0-rc2.tar.gz All RCs here: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/nsww1t3adru9p3o/JvkcvlOcxA -MinRK On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Brian Knox wrote: > That did the trick! > > > On Tue, Feb 5, 201

Re: [zeromq-dev] Question for java users

2013-02-09 Thread Trevor Bernard
> For the best optimised multithread application within a process, the > concurrent package and disruptor would give better solution. But it would > not scale well. What do you mean by "would not scale well"? ___ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.