[nanomsg] Re: Persisted reliable messaging
- From: Paul Colomiets <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "nanomsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <nanomsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 18:47:20 +0200
Hi Jörg,
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Jörg Singler <joerg@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I used the following stacking
> of patterns: Pub -> SUB (filtering on topics) -> Files
I'm not sure about your use case, but pub-sub chain can loose
messages when pushback is applied (when subscriber is not fast
enough). And I'd say this defeats the whole purpose of the
persistence.
> -> req -> reply
> (sending aknowledge only) -> PUSH --> PULL (distributing work to multiple
> workers).
I don't think you need aknowldedge here, because you can loose a
message in push-pull anyway. Unless you do push/pull via inproc/ipc.
> Do you think the stacking should/can be optimized? I will keep you
> updated...
>
I think you are thinking in terms of "lets make rabbitmq over nanomsg"
rather than "lets solve the task in neat way". I.e. you use 3 message
patterns for doing a single task. That's not how nanomsg is supposed
to work IMO.
Do you have higher level task in mind, that you can describe? Or do
you just playing with things as time permits?
--
Paul
Other related posts:
