One more thing: clients and workers work and sending their messages but
zmq_poll() hangs.
On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 5:49 PM, dan smith wrote:
>
> Hi Jason and others,
>
> I am trying to implement the load balancing pattern idea. First I just
> would like to make "lbbroker: L
orker_task, NULL, 0,
NULL);
}
For some reason in hangs in select() in zmq_poll() .
What can be the reason for that?
On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 5:44 PM, dan smith wrote:
>
> Hi Jason and others,
>
> I am trying to implement the load balancing pattern idea. First I just
> wou
k, NULL, 0,
NULL);
}
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 9:06 AM, dan smith wrote:
> Jason,
>
> Thanks for the suggestion. I will apply the lbb broker pattern right away
> to that problem and will share the results. To me it is a good news that
> this is a design issue...
>
> Dan
&
re just sitting around. So you guess was right about the
> sockets just sitting there in some threads. The time being "wasted" however
> is sadly a design issue at this point, not so much ZeroMQ ;)
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> Lastly as a bonus, this load balancing pattern me
t;> speed up for all numbers of equations. I am using the release version of
>> the dll however. About to test the debug version of the dll to see if I get
>> different behaviour.
>>
>> - J
>>
>>
>> On 23 January 2013 13:56, dan smith wrote:
>>
>>
13 at 8:13 PM, Jason Smith wrote:
>
> On 23 January 2013 11:42, dan smith wrote:
>
>> while(nfinish > 0)
>
>
> Haven't had a chance to compile this here. For some reason have a linker
> issue on my work machine.
>
> At first glance the "while(nfinish
Jan 22, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Jason Smith wrote:
> Do you have some code to share? Particularly the ZMQ socket connection and
> creation.
>
> On another thought, how is the "Finish" determined? Do the threads end, or
> do they continue to wait for another message? Is a "finishe
more precisely: 'I do not know how to debug that further'
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 2:49 AM, dan smith wrote:
>
> Claudio,
>
> Thanks for your answer.
>
> When it comes to 8, the timing changes randomly, sometime times is less
> than the time needed to solve 80 equ
, Claudio Carbone wrote:
> dan smith wrote:
> >80 times: 64614micros and 134429micros, the serial is already faster.
> >
> >Going down to 8: 6345 and 328286...
> >
>
> There must be something wrong if it takes less to solve 80eqs than 8, no
> matter what.
> W
Claudio
> -- Sent from my ParanoidAndroid Galaxy Nexus with K-9 Mail.
>
> dan smith wrote:
>>
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> I have got a multi threading application. It uses a pool of threads. Each
>> thread in the pool communicates with the main thread via ZM
10 matches
Mail list logo
