For me personally, mangos is a good reason to learn Go
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 1, 2016, at 5:19 PM, 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
