Ah shoot. I really need that. I'll try to resurrect it. What would be a good alternative name for it?
Maybe it should come back as a socket option? Thoughts? Chris On Apr 15, 2010, at 5:44 PM, Martin Lucina wrote: > ch...@chriswongstudio.com said: >> I have an application that needs to send out a message as soon as possible >> without waiting for the optimistic batching. Latency is more important than >> message throughput. Is there a switch I can use with zmq_setsockopt to >> disable batching? I looked at the man page but couldn't find anything there >> that can remotely do what I want to do. > > There was a zmq_flush() call pre 2.0.6 which AFAIK did exactly this, but it > got taken out since too many people thought it really meant "flush the > socket". > > Maybe it can come back as a differently named socket option. In the mean > time, you're out of luck. > > -mato > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
