[nanomsg] Re: Where "Channel ID" are managed in the code ?
- From: Paul Colomiets <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "nanomsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <nanomsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 07:47:35 +0200
Hi Martin,
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 7:01 AM, Martin Sustrik <sustrik@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> -----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.
>
>
From the text, it seems that only nearest peer id is checked against, right?
So if we have the following scheme:
(many clients) -> A -> B -> (many workers)
Only a single worker is used, because all clients of A look like single
client to B, right?
--
Paul
Other related posts:
