On 13 April 2011 09:44, Martin Sustrik wrote:
> On 04/13/2011 09:26 AM, Martin Sustrik wrote:
>
> > Ah, I should have said IP+DNS rather than just IP. Sorry.
>
> I would suggest looking at the design of HTTP, which is pretty similar
> to the "send-to-address" pattern we are discussing.
>
> HTTP i
On 14 April 2011 05:33, Joshua Foster wrote:
> Has anyone had success using zeromq in a J2EE application?
>
Yes, I used it to quickly (1 day work) bypass a scalability issue on by java
stack (jetty->cxf->solr) and
reach 800 query-per-sec rate using a nodejs proxy on a 8 core machine
previously 5
On 15 April 2011 02:57, Joshua Foster wrote:
> Based on what I am seeing, the EJB's don't support JNI calls. Its
> explicitly discouraged in the spec, but not all the containers add the
> security to disable access. The odd thing is that it looks like it links
> correctly, but dies on the send.
On 12 May 2011 00:01, Pieter Hintjens 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 it's possibl
On 20 May 2011 15:27, Attila-Mihaly Balazs wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> I'm playing around with ZMQ + Java and I've run into a couple of problems.
> The test program which I use is attached [1]. What I try to do:
> - start a published and a subscriber on a IPC transport (ipc://zeromq_test)
> - pu
On 20 May 2011 18:09, Pieter Hintjens wrote:
> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 6:00 PM, Martin Sustrik
> wrote:
>
> > The problem is that using single socket from mutliple threads can cause
> > basically any error, whether assertion, segfault or whatever. Singling
> > this one out doesn't make much sens
On 10 June 2011 17:33, Martin Sustrik wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> >>> For zmq_poll(), only select/poll based polling is available.
> >>
> >> Are there any plans to implement the advanced polling mechanisms
> >> into zmq_poll where available? Not that I suffer from any
> >> performance problem in zmq_p
On 11 June 2011 13:59, Martin Sustrik wrote:
> On 06/11/2011 11:23 AM, Pieter Hintjens wrote:
> > For the CZMQ zloop reactor, at least, we're only rebuilding the pollset
> > when there's a change. So that'd work nicely with epoll et al.
>
> Ok. I should have not mentioned the second caveat. The r
Hi Andreas,
I noticed that you use zmq_msg_init_data to create a message pointing to a
static buffer which you share between oustanding messages.
With this small change your test code works.
--- bug.c.old 2011-01-20 15:05:16.534210001 +0100
+++ bug.c 2011-01-20 15:05:37.884210001 +0100
@@ -30,7
On 24 January 2011 01:06, Yusuf Simonson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to build a pub/sub engine on top of jzmq for performing
> distributed computation in cloud environments. Systems have a relatively
> high chance of failure, so I want to ensure reliability.
>
> I was wondering if there was any a
On 2 February 2011 13:25, Chuck Remes wrote:
>
> On Feb 2, 2011, at 3:33 AM, Andrew Hume wrote:
>
> > i don't have permissions to tcpdump.
> > i'm running 2.0.9
>
> Unless you are running your application on ports less than 1025, I don't
> think you need elevated privileges to attach to the ports
On 20 March 2011 09:09, Pieter Hintjens wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 9:21 PM, John W Higgins wrote:
>
> >> This is neat. It's something lots of people have discussed making but
> >> no-one's actually done.
> >
> > Zed Shaw has a very nice implementation baked into the Mongrel2 web
> server
>
On 20 March 2011 16:22, Pieter Hintjens wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Marko Mikulicic
> wrote:
>
> > So the focus is on using HTTP as a transport protocol, between zeromq
> peers,
> > not intended to be used as an interoperability solution, did I understand
&
13 matches
Mail list logo
