[nanomsg] Re: The name service for nanomsg
- From: Martin Sustrik <sustrik@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: nanomsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2013 12:50:24 +0200
On 09/09/13 12:31, Schmurfy wrote:
I suppose this may be useful but if such service is implemented I hope
it would be optional, for simple application I think configuration files
are more then enough.
The reason I started looking into zeromq, crossroads and now nanomsg is
because they are (or were) all low level construction blocks allowing
you to easily build incredible things, zeromq got stuffed with many
things I don't really like I just hope nanomsg does not take the same
road :)
Yes, classic feature-creep problem.
Options are good but they should not be mandatory in my opinion.
Yes.
At the moment, the idea is to have a separate address family for the
configuration service.
So, you would have to say "nn_socket (AF_SP_CONFIG, NN_PUB);" or
something similar to use it.
With classic AF_SP sockets, everything will remain as is.
That being said, I believe that even if you are using nanomsg as
low-level building blocks, some of the admin functionality would still
be useful for you. Not the configuration stuff, rather the monitoring stuff.
Imagine writing the code as you do today, no need to change single line
of code and being able to launch the administrative console and see the
current state of the topology, for example:
+---+
+--|SUB|
/ +---+
+---+ +---+
|PUB|----|SUB|
+---+ +---+
\ +---+
+--|SUB|
+---+
With all the connections annotated by info, such as "connection broken:
not able to connect to the remote endpoint" or "this connection drops
messages because the consumer is too slow" or "current throughput on
this connection is 1000 msgs/sec" etc.
Martin
Other related posts:
