On 01/03/2011 05:18 PM, Douglas Creager wrote: > I like the symmetric design — that way nothing is ignored, like > Pieter suggests. And it also matches the TCP case better. In the > TCP case, there's a buffer of SNDHWM messages on one side, and a > buffer of RCVHWM messages on the other. So in the inproc case, there > should be a single buffer of SNDHWM+RCVHWM messages.
Ok. That would require passing each peer's HWM to the other peer. So that both can compute and use sum HWM instead of the original local HWM. In short: 1. There's ctx_t::register_endpoint function which register inproc endpoint with the context. We can store bind()er's HWM there. 2. When connect()er retrieves the ednpoint, it would get bind()er's HWM along with it, it will add the two HWMs and initialise the newly created pipe accordingly. Martin _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
