[nanomsg] Re: Where "Channel ID" are managed in the code ?
- From: Martin Sustrik <sustrik@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: nanomsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 06:01:58 +0100
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 15/01/14 21:05, Paul Colomiets wrote:
> How does this work for with devices? I think it breaks the
> scalability principle.
I don't think so. It's the same principle, but a different
granularity. With the req/rep as we have it today it's individual
requests that are load-balanced among workers. With "snappy" variant
it's clients that are load-balanced among workers.
Of course, the latter it's somehow less scalable, but in an
environment with large amount of clients, each issuing negligible part
of the requests, it may work pretty well.
Martin
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJS12fGAAoJENTpVjxCNN9YdfwIAJq58LExhMdoIbHzMjqrzSvD
C4oPKqnjg0htoxKS4T02oYBF1JuL7H5XWXqX3lZe9cfrXpcLCQis63jajJdXSeEt
GRUOn9jyDFlVkiRW9FrxcEQcJ3GWlZshNDeHzHW5RaHP2qopsn1jVZ32rX4EyUDQ
N7thrvc8605/Tmvujae6exzZ6LWTFtI7vrJ3KWdBZuajwZMTThpLhVeF926nypaT
rJqiHOlhNylLzX3AQNjy/Gu6L7MH9Ff9KpR3hE05A0xcNiia01JZEebrtamFYeGi
6oDpEi99Ks62Pcrwrh6m7cXbIPPmNXuiO6wbxoR6hJRx+R8Cpsx20y5EqHnNHC8=
=3/kq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Other related posts:
