You could make Storm do what you want, but it's not going to work well for you. A normal client/server is vastly more suited to the type of workload you want.
UDP may have less overhead, but overall a stall in processing is much more costly. In a datacenter, TCP is the way to go for reliable communications. UDP is popular between game client & server because of packet loss's effect on TCP RTT, and packet loss is common between consumers and game servers. Not as much between DC nodes. Storm's support for other languages isn't exactly anything special. You could effect the same interface in non-Storm code. Again, Storm can do processing in low-latency situations (<100ms), but it's not what you want. You really, really don't want Storm for this application. A custom application (yes, you can indeed use Netty UDP) will be much much better for you. If your game server is just running business logic, a totally stateless set of servers is really the way to go. Michael Rose (@Xorlev <https://twitter.com/xorlev>) Senior Platform Engineer, FullContact <http://www.fullcontact.com/> mich...@fullcontact.com On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Why do you think that UDP is faster? > > > > > On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 6:27 PM, joe roberts <carl.roberts.zap...@gmail.com > > wrote: > >> To make it faster! >> >> >> On 6/8/2014 8:27 PM, Ted Dunning wrote: >> >> >> On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 12:12 PM, joe roberts < >> carl.roberts.zap...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Also, it seems Storm uses TCP via ZeroMQ by default -Is that right? And >>> if so, can it be switched to use UDP or UDT instead, perhaps by replacing >>> ZeroMQ with Netty? >>> >> >> Why would you want that? >> >> >> >> >
