[nanomsg] interesting performance figures
- From: Garrett D'Amore <garrett.damore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: nanomsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 22:41:50 -0700
http://garrett.damore.org/2014/03/early-performance-numbers.html
That’s my brief update on my work. I’ve added inproc, PAIR protocol support,
and benchmarks (tests). I know folks want UDP… I’m a little concerned about
proceeding with UDP only because of the difficulty of keep track of pipes on a
connectionless (and no keepalives) transport. For req/reqp, this could get
ugly. I need to think about this more. Its also unclear how pub/sub works in
this case, since there isn’t an actual “connected” end point to keep track of.
The semantics get… sticky. And as others have pointed out, there may be other
concerns about enabling UDP (congestion control, etc.) I don’t know what the
right answer here is. (For me, its to stick with TCP. :-) But my use cases
are relatively simple and I’m not trying to stream or to multiplex a bunch of
different things onto a single TCP channel. :-)
— Garrett
Other related posts:
