There you go :)
http://paste.ubuntu.com/1691357/
Éric
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 12:33 PM, Pieter Hintjens wrote:
> Eric.
>
> Could you make a minimal test case perhaps, stripping out every line
> that isn't actually needed to reproduce the case? Thanks.
>
> -Pieter
>
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 6
Eric.
Could you make a minimal test case perhaps, stripping out every line
that isn't actually needed to reproduce the case? Thanks.
-Pieter
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 6:16 PM, Eric Robert wrote:
> Hi,
>
> My first posting on zeromq :)
>
> I am trying to debug a situation where the socket and its
Hi,
My first posting on zeromq :)
I am trying to debug a situation where the socket and its monitor are
created and used on the same thread. It seems to stay stuck when I send
something on the monitored socket. Is that expected?
I reproduced the situation (see req3 and sm3) inside the test_monit
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 10:29 AM, Michael Haberler wrote:
> First, it is unclear what the 'joined' status actually means, since that isnt
> defined. If I assume 'joined' means '2-way communication is possible with
> this node', then the method outlined fails to ascertain that property
> consis
I think the best would be to bundle everything together in the jar. I recently
did some work with the sqlite JDBC driver, it works like a charm and for a
minute you can actually believe it is all pure Java code... I would try
following that model.
--
Gonzalo Diethelm
DCV Chile
> -Origina
What are your thoughts on removing the option to install jzmq.so?
Either include it as a native dependency or package the .dll, .so,
.dylib in the same jar? Currently we have to worry about libzmq, jzmq,
and the java library jiving in order to get a functional install.
-Trev
_
reading through the ZRE spec http://rfc.zeromq.org/spec:20
I see a fundamental problem of state agreement through the node discovery
process as outline there. The problem is with this sentence "When a ZRE node
receives a beacon from a node that it does not already know about, it SHALL
consider
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 8:00 AM, Erwin Karbasi wrote:
> Hello Experts,
>
> We've ran a light POC with java binding zeromq for pub/sub paradigm and
> figured out that there were tremendous messages were lost, that is, the sub
> didn't receive them.
>
This is normal in the state of hitting the HW
You could steal the Storm's idea if you need a certain level of reliablity.
https://github.com/nathanmarz/storm/wiki/Guaranteeing-message-processing
But basically, it would be extremely hard to achive exactly-once messaging
without a severe performance penalty.
Thanks
Min
2013년 2월 20일 수요일에 Ian
Hello Experts,
We've ran a light POC with java binding zeromq for pub/sub paradigm and
figured out that there were tremendous messages were lost, that is, the sub
didn't receive them.
I'd appreciate if you could shed some light what we are doing wrong?
Thanks in advance,
Erwin
__
10 matches
Mail list logo
