[nanomsg] Re: Priotitised Load Balancing with nanomsg
- From: Paul Colomiets <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: nanomsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 22:11:46 +0200
Hi Martin,
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Martin Sustrik <sustrik@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've written a blog post about the new feature. It can be found here:
>
> http://www.250bpm.com/blog:14
>
Very nice feature. Using priorities for failover looks just right.
However, do you think receive priorities are useful at all? It seems
that if your consumer is fast enough to consume all the messages, then
priorities make almost no difference. If your consumer is not fast
enough to consume both high- and low-priority messages you just have a
lot of stale data in the low-priority pipe. (Note most of the time
requests will be timeouted, because that's the only way to deliver
message reliably).
Do you have any use cases in mind?
--
Paul
Other related posts:
