Hi Steven, Java is not finding the DLL. It needs to go somewhere in your path. You probably have the older version in C:\windows\system32 or something like that.
As for the 64-bit issue -- I compiled 0MQ and JZMQ in x64 without any trouble on my Win7 x64 machine in VS10 - not sure what your issue is without more info? Scott On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 5:40 AM, <[email protected]>wrote: > Send zeromq-dev mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of zeromq-dev digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Exception in thread "main" java.lang.UnsatisfiedLinkError: no > jzmq in java.library.path (Windows) (Steven Dahlin) > 2. Re: Exception in thread "main" > java.lang.UnsatisfiedLinkError: no jzmq in java.library.path > (Windows) (Joshua Foster) > 3. New faster 0MQ bindings for Lua & LuaJIT2 (Robert G. Jakabosky) > 4. Re: New faster 0MQ bindings for Lua & LuaJIT2 (Pieter Hintjens) > 5. Re: New faster 0MQ bindings for Lua & LuaJIT2 > (Robert G. Jakabosky) > 6. Re: New faster 0MQ bindings for Lua & LuaJIT2 (Martin Sustrik) > 7. Re: New faster 0MQ bindings for Lua & LuaJIT2 > (Robert G. Jakabosky) > 8. Re: New faster 0MQ bindings for Lua & LuaJIT2 (Pieter Hintjens) > 9. Re: New faster 0MQ bindings for Lua & LuaJIT2 (Pieter Hintjens) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 18:23:54 -0700 > From: Steven Dahlin <[email protected]> > Subject: [zeromq-dev] Exception in thread "main" > java.lang.UnsatisfiedLinkError: no jzmq in java.library.path > (Windows) > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > The message is occurring when I attempt to initialize a context in Java > with: > ZMQ.Context context = ZMQ.context(1); > > I have downloaded the latest files for zmq and jzmq off of Github. > The java jars (zmq.jar and jzmq-2.1.0-SNAPSHOT.jar) were compiled > using "mvn compile:compile" and "mvn jar:jar" The libzmq.lib (inside > the zmq project) and the jzmq.dll and libzmq.dll were generated using > Visual Studio 2010 Express. I should note that my workstation runs 64 > bit Win7 but the libs were compiled as Win32 versions (When I tried > generated the 64 bit versions problems abounded). Could anyone give > me any clues as to how to resolve this. We had been using older > versions of jzmq but I needed the latest so as to utilize the polling > features. > > Thanks > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 22:32:19 -0500 > From: Joshua Foster <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [zeromq-dev] Exception in thread "main" > java.lang.UnsatisfiedLinkError: no jzmq in java.library.path > (Windows) > To: ZeroMQ development list <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > The UnsatisfiedLinkError is because the the directory containing the dll's > needs to be on the PATH Environment variable. > > Joshua > > On Feb 25, 2011, at 8:23 PM, Steven Dahlin wrote: > > > The message is occurring when I attempt to initialize a context in Java > with: > > ZMQ.Context context = ZMQ.context(1); > > > > I have downloaded the latest files for zmq and jzmq off of Github. > > The java jars (zmq.jar and jzmq-2.1.0-SNAPSHOT.jar) were compiled > > using "mvn compile:compile" and "mvn jar:jar" The libzmq.lib (inside > > the zmq project) and the jzmq.dll and libzmq.dll were generated using > > Visual Studio 2010 Express. I should note that my workstation runs 64 > > bit Win7 but the libs were compiled as Win32 versions (When I tried > > generated the 64 bit versions problems abounded). Could anyone give > > me any clues as to how to resolve this. We had been using older > > versions of jzmq but I needed the latest so as to utilize the polling > > features. > > > > Thanks > > _______________________________________________ > > zeromq-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 00:45:26 -0800 > From: "Robert G. Jakabosky" <[email protected]> > Subject: [zeromq-dev] New faster 0MQ bindings for Lua & LuaJIT2 > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > Here has been a lot of talk on the Lua mailing list about a new feature in > LuaJIT2 called FFI (foreign function interface). The new FFI feature > greatly > improves the performance of Lua code when running under LuaJIT2, but it > doesn't work under the standard Lua VM. So I have create a hybrid Lua > module > [1] that has normal C bindings and FFI-based bindings for 0MQ. > > Also the new bindings have support for sending/receving messages using the > zmq_msg_t structure. This improves the performance even more under LuaJIT2 > and gets the throughput to almost equal that of the C++ benchmark. > > Throughput benchmark using the tcp transport over localhost: > message size: 30 [B] > message count: 100000000 > > Orignal Lua bindings running under Lua 5.1.4: > mean throughput: 1395864 [msg/s] > mean throughput: 335.007 [Mb/s] > > New bindings running under Lua 5.1.4: > mean throughput: 1577407 [msg/s] > mean throughput: 378.578 [Mb/s] > > Orignal Lua bindings running under LuaJIT2 (git HEAD): > mean throughput: 2516850 [msg/s] > mean throughput: 604.044 [Mb/s] > > New bindings running under LuaJIT2 (git HEAD): > mean throughput: 5112158 [msg/s] > mean throughput: 1226.918 [Mb/s] > > New bindings using send_msg/recv_msg functions running under LuaJIT2 (git > HEAD): > mean throughput: 6160911 [msg/s] > mean throughput: 1478.619 [Mb/s] > > C++ code: > mean throughput: 6241452 [msg/s] > mean throughput: 1497.948 [Mb/s] > > > 1. https://github.com/Neopallium/lua-zmq > > -- > Robert G. Jakabosky > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 09:57:27 +0100 > From: Pieter Hintjens <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [zeromq-dev] New faster 0MQ bindings for Lua & LuaJIT2 > To: ZeroMQ development list <[email protected]> > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Robert, 6M msg/second from Lua, up from 1.3M/sec! Very nice indeed. > > Feel free to update http://www.zeromq.org/bindings:lua. > > I'd advise you also to put these performance results into your README, > so it's clear to visitors to the project why they want it. > > -Pieter > > On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 9:45 AM, Robert G. Jakabosky > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Here has been a lot of talk on the Lua mailing list about a new feature > in > > LuaJIT2 called FFI (foreign function interface). ?The new FFI feature > greatly > > improves the performance of Lua code when running under LuaJIT2, but it > > doesn't work under the standard Lua VM. ?So I have create a hybrid Lua > module > > [1] that has normal C bindings and FFI-based bindings for 0MQ. > > > > Also the new bindings have support for sending/receving messages using > the > > zmq_msg_t structure. ?This improves the performance even more under > LuaJIT2 > > and gets the throughput to almost equal that of the C++ benchmark. > > > > Throughput benchmark using the tcp transport over localhost: > > message size: 30 [B] > > message count: 100000000 > > > > Orignal Lua bindings running under Lua 5.1.4: > > mean throughput: 1395864 [msg/s] > > mean throughput: 335.007 [Mb/s] > > > > New bindings running under Lua 5.1.4: > > mean throughput: 1577407 [msg/s] > > mean throughput: 378.578 [Mb/s] > > > > Orignal Lua bindings running under LuaJIT2 (git HEAD): > > mean throughput: 2516850 [msg/s] > > mean throughput: 604.044 [Mb/s] > > > > New bindings running under LuaJIT2 (git HEAD): > > mean throughput: 5112158 [msg/s] > > mean throughput: 1226.918 [Mb/s] > > > > New bindings using send_msg/recv_msg functions running under LuaJIT2 (git > > HEAD): > > mean throughput: 6160911 [msg/s] > > mean throughput: 1478.619 [Mb/s] > > > > C++ code: > > mean throughput: 6241452 [msg/s] > > mean throughput: 1497.948 [Mb/s] > > > > > > 1. https://github.com/Neopallium/lua-zmq > > > > -- > > Robert G. Jakabosky > > _______________________________________________ > > zeromq-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 01:50:46 -0800 > From: "Robert G. Jakabosky" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [zeromq-dev] New faster 0MQ bindings for Lua & LuaJIT2 > To: ZeroMQ development list <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > On Saturday 26, Pieter Hintjens wrote: > > Robert, 6M msg/second from Lua, up from 1.3M/sec! Very nice indeed. > > > > Feel free to update http://www.zeromq.org/bindings:lua. > > done. > > > I'd advise you also to put these performance results into your README, > > so it's clear to visitors to the project why they want it. > > and done. > > > -Pieter > > > > On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 9:45 AM, Robert G. Jakabosky > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Here has been a lot of talk on the Lua mailing list about a new feature > > > in LuaJIT2 called FFI (foreign function interface). The new FFI > feature > > > greatly improves the performance of Lua code when running under > LuaJIT2, > > > but it doesn't work under the standard Lua VM. So I have create a > > > hybrid Lua module [1] that has normal C bindings and FFI-based bindings > > > for 0MQ. > > > > > > Also the new bindings have support for sending/receving messages using > > > the zmq_msg_t structure. This improves the performance even more under > > > LuaJIT2 and gets the throughput to almost equal that of the C++ > > > benchmark. > > > > > > Throughput benchmark using the tcp transport over localhost: > > > message size: 30 [B] > > > message count: 100000000 > > > > > > Orignal Lua bindings running under Lua 5.1.4: > > > mean throughput: 1395864 [msg/s] > > > mean throughput: 335.007 [Mb/s] > > > > > > New bindings running under Lua 5.1.4: > > > mean throughput: 1577407 [msg/s] > > > mean throughput: 378.578 [Mb/s] > > > > > > Orignal Lua bindings running under LuaJIT2 (git HEAD): > > > mean throughput: 2516850 [msg/s] > > > mean throughput: 604.044 [Mb/s] > > > > > > New bindings running under LuaJIT2 (git HEAD): > > > mean throughput: 5112158 [msg/s] > > > mean throughput: 1226.918 [Mb/s] > > > > > > New bindings using send_msg/recv_msg functions running under LuaJIT2 > (git > > > HEAD): > > > mean throughput: 6160911 [msg/s] > > > mean throughput: 1478.619 [Mb/s] > > > > > > C++ code: > > > mean throughput: 6241452 [msg/s] > > > mean throughput: 1497.948 [Mb/s] > > > > > > > > > 1. https://github.com/Neopallium/lua-zmq > > > > > > -- > > > Robert G. Jakabosky > > > _______________________________________________ > > > zeromq-dev mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > > zeromq-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > > > -- > Robert G. Jakabosky > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 11:17:15 +0100 > From: Martin Sustrik <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [zeromq-dev] New faster 0MQ bindings for Lua & LuaJIT2 > To: ZeroMQ development list <[email protected]> > Cc: "Robert G. Jakabosky" <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Hi Robert, > > >> Feel free to update http://www.zeromq.org/bindings:lua. > > > > done. > > As far as I understand you have overwritten the original Lua binding. > Given that the new binding doesn't work with all Lua VMs it's definitely > not a good idea. > > I would suggest either keeping both bindings on the page or creating a > separate page, say 'lua-ffi'. > > Martin > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 02:35:41 -0800 > From: "Robert G. Jakabosky" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [zeromq-dev] New faster 0MQ bindings for Lua & LuaJIT2 > To: ZeroMQ development list <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > On Saturday 26, Martin Sustrik wrote: > > Hi Robert, > > > > >> Feel free to update http://www.zeromq.org/bindings:lua. > > > > > > done. > > > > As far as I understand you have overwritten the original Lua binding. > > Given that the new binding doesn't work with all Lua VMs it's definitely > > not a good idea. > > The new bindings do work on all Lua VMs that support that standard Lua C > API. > When loaded a Lua VM other then LuaJIT2 (i.e. using Lua 5.1.x or LuaJIT > 1.2.x) > it will fallback to using the standard Lua C API (just like the old > bindings). > There isn't even any linking issues since the C code of the new bindings > uses > only the standard Lua C API (The FFI bindings are pure Lua code). > > > I would suggest either keeping both bindings on the page or creating a > > separate page, say 'lua-ffi'. > > I had though about creating a new page like that, but the new bindings do > not > require FFI support so I don't want people thinking that they only work > with > FFI. > > I can create a new bindings page if you want. Not sure how best to > structure > a page with both the old and new bindings on one page. > > For now I will just move my bindings over to 'lua-ffi'. > > > Martin > > _______________________________________________ > > zeromq-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > > > -- > Robert G. Jakabosky > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 8 > Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 11:38:40 +0100 > From: Pieter Hintjens <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [zeromq-dev] New faster 0MQ bindings for Lua & LuaJIT2 > To: ZeroMQ development list <[email protected]> > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Robert G. Jakabosky > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > For now I will just move my bindings over to 'lua-ffi'. > > No, please don't do that. We have other languages such as Ruby that > also have FFI bindings. We have languages like C# with three or more > bindings. It would become messy to make a page for each variation. > > As long as there are users of a particular binding it should be > documented. You can then work with the author of the older binding to > merge the two and deprecate the older one, and give users consensus > about upgrading. > > In general people using a binding in production will not trust new > code for a while. > > So I've put both bindings onto the page, please fix the titles if > they're inaccurate. > > Cheers > Pieter > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 9 > Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 11:40:34 +0100 > From: Pieter Hintjens <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [zeromq-dev] New faster 0MQ bindings for Lua & LuaJIT2 > To: ZeroMQ development list <[email protected]> > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Pieter Hintjens <[email protected]> wrote: > > > No, please don't do that. We have other languages such as Ruby that > > also have FFI bindings. We have languages like C# with three or more > > bindings. It would become messy to make a page for each variation. > > I'm aware that Ruby-FFI has its own page, it shouldn't as far as I'm > concerned. > > -Pieter > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > > > End of zeromq-dev Digest, Vol 38, Issue 80 > ****************************************** >
_______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
