There are issues which are important as you mentioned, internals and
inferior design. Focusing on basics and digging-in to bring up the level of
performance as the product of such tattempt is really rewarding. But,
decoration, clean-up and design considerations important in architecture
design is not something we could dismiss in this journey. Considering ACE
framework and constructing a comparison table, we can see how far nano has
to travel and in what level of attemp by which brings opportunity costs
bottom-up for right decision making, to gain a robust and concrete
foundation to resist against probable turbulences which could disclose
unsystematic risks with huge impacts.
Technology as an ingrediant in economy has Its weight in balancing and
accordingly assisting economic breath. But Its weight is not independent of
other factors and could be manipulatied in variety of ways, directly or
indirectly.
And the beadthing apparatus is not something which been invented in one
night.
Anyhow, nanomsg could be think of a seed which requires dilligence to be a
trunk in the jungle of technologies in direction of society benefit.
Bests,
Omid Shahraki
On 2 Oct 2016 03:49, "Garrett D'Amore" <garrett@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
zeromq has a larger community, more contributors and is more widely used.
For many people that would decide the issue right there. (For zmq).
zmq tries to solve all communication problems and IMO that has lead to
some inferior design choices and an evolving wire protocol. It is also
developed in C++ which for me made adoption difficult.
nanomsg has some technical and legal benefits. Would I use it in
production? Yes, but then I am the maintainer. There are many things that
I do not like about the internals of nanomsg but compared to most
"production level freeware" it is vastly superior. I am not the only
person working on nanomsg but I do most of the work. I would like more
people to get involved.
If you are in the position of using golang I would strongly encourage you
to look at mangos. It is protocol compatible with nanomsg but is IMO
vastly superior. It has some technical benefits over nanomsg as well. It
is used by a number of enterprises in production.
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 30, 2016, at 5:53 PM, Sean OConnor (Redacted sender "sean_c4s" for
DMARC) <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"5- Do you care about support, documentation and an active community?"
Given the number of years spent on that project the lack of extensive
documentation indicates an unwillingness to do hard work or anything that
isn't fun. Anyway it should be more reliable than Java threadpools and
easier to do correctly. Time will tell.
On Saturday, October 1, 2016 7:51 AM, omid shahraki <
dreamstechgroup@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi there,
First of all, I suggest to take a look at following links to see if you
are investing on a right solution considering the Enterprise. I am not
going to encourage you but doing a bit research could assist you in right
decision making.
----------------------------------------------------------------
http://bravenewgeek.com/a-look-at-nanomsg-and-scalability-protocols/
http://hintjens.com/blog:112
http://sealedabstract.com/rants/nanomsg-postmortem-and-other-stories/
----------------------------------------------------------------
Well, now let's get back to our session. It is not that easy to decide for
a middleware solution. But considering your limited list, we can raise
questions which could assist in our decision making process.
1- Do you care about standard sockets and interop?
2- Do you care about lock-free patterns?
3- Do you care about throughput and latency?
4- Do you care about memory allocation performance?
5- Do you care about support, documentation and an active community?
6- Do you care about architecture patterns?
7- Do you care about OS/Platform independency?
Are just some questions we can ask concerning the items you mentioned in
your list.
When we are going to consider an enterprise, It is not only technology and
we have to take macro-factors into account either.
Bests,
Omid Shahraki
On 30 Sep 2016 22:38, "jfear@xxxxxxxxxxxx" <jfear@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi all,
I am a developer looking at options for communication middleware. ZeroMQ
and nanomsg are both compelling options. Ideally, nanomsg offers design
improvements and would be the choice.
But the project is obviously a lot less mature than zeroMQ, which has been
around for years longer. I'd like to get the opinion of the contributors:
Is the first production release of nanomsg 1.0.0 reliable enough to be used
in an enterprise setting? Does anyone know of a large piece of software
that is currently using nanomsg for middleware communication?
Thanks,
Jake Fear