[Time] Name | Message |
[04:17] EduardoFonseca
|
Hi Guys. I'm trying to figure out how to implement connection dettection on top of zeroMQ. Any tips?
|
[04:17] EduardoFonseca
|
*detection, sorry.
|
[04:37] EduardoFonseca
|
great
|
[04:38] EduardoFonseca
|
but what about detecting when this connection has gone away?
|
[04:38] EduardoFonseca
|
I tried implementing heartbeats, but the code started to get really complex.
|
[04:40] EduardoFonseca
|
I'm using XREQ and XREP... but the loadbalancing part got complex.
|
[04:40] EduardoFonseca
|
I was planning to reimplement the Majordomo pattern... but, why use zeroMQ if you need a broker? :)
|
[17:09] mikko
|
howdy guys
|
[17:57] Guthur
|
hey mikko
|
[17:57] Guthur
|
do you know if Ian Barbers PHP presentation slides are available anywhere for download, besides slideshare
|
[17:58] mikko
|
Guthur: let me check
|
[17:59] mikko
|
his blog seems to be down
|
[18:06] Guthur
|
ok, I'll check it later
|
[18:06] Guthur
|
cheers mikko
|
[18:14] mikko
|
i can ask him for a pdf
|
[18:25] Guthur
|
mikko, that would great, cheers
|
[18:36] pieter_hintjens
|
Guthur: slideshare should offer downloads, doesn't it?
|
[18:36] Guthur
|
pieter_hintjens, It does. i just didn't want to sign up
|
[18:36] pieter_hintjens
|
yeah
|
[18:41] mikko
|
finally got some more build capacity online
|
[18:41] mikko
|
x86_64 centos
|
[18:41] mikko
|
rpms are now built every night
|
[18:43] mikko
|
pieter_hintjens: i'll try to add libzapi today
|
[18:43] pieter_hintjens
|
mikko: nice!
|
[18:43] pieter_hintjens
|
I also renamed ZFL to libzfl, you saw that
|
[18:43] mikko
|
i did
|
[18:43] Guthur
|
I was actually going to draw some inspiration from Ian's presentation for a presentation at work
|
[18:43] mikko
|
i was away yesterday and today
|
[18:43] mikko
|
spa weekend
|
[18:43] pieter_hintjens
|
:-) it was excellent weather here in Belgium
|
[18:43] mikko
|
been doing nothing but soaking in warm water
|
[18:44] Guthur
|
I've been wanting to ask him if it would be ok to borrow some stuff, just haven't been able to catch him in here
|
[18:49] pieterh
|
all code blocks highlighted, all collapsible (except a few)
|
[18:49] pieterh
|
http://zguide.zeromq.org/test:ch1
|
[19:45] Guthur
|
it loads for me
|
[19:45] Guthur
|
but there is issues with the language translation link
|
[19:45] Guthur
|
links*
|
[19:45] pieterh
|
yes, reload in a few heartbeats...
|
[19:45] pieterh
|
the problem is the marked up code blocks are huge
|
[19:46] pieterh
|
including 320 of them in the page kind of does not work
|
[19:46] Guthur
|
hehe, I can imagine
|
[19:47] pieterh
|
it should work better now, code examples appear in a new tab
|
[19:47] pieterh
|
shame, it was kind of nice to have them inline...
|
[19:50] Guthur
|
oh new tabs, umm, I tend to curse pages that do that
|
[19:51] Guthur
|
is the C version still inline?
|
[19:53] pieterh
|
well, nope, but I'm going to make a further round of improvements
|
[19:53] pieterh
|
will inline the C version
|
[19:53] pieterh
|
and ditto for the PHP version
|
[19:56] mikko
|
pieterh: http://build.zero.mq/job/libzapi/3/console
|
[19:56] mikko
|
ROUTER and DEALER are not in the main repo?
|
[19:56] mikko
|
the one that sustrik maintains
|
[19:56] pieterh
|
nope
|
[19:57] pieterh
|
libzapi needs 2.1.latest
|
[19:57] pieterh
|
I'm hoping sustrik will eventually make the ROUTER/DEALER changes but can't force him to
|
[19:57] pieterh
|
mikko: hang on, I'
|
[19:57] mikko
|
this situation is very confusing
|
[19:57] pieterh
|
I'll make a patch to libzapi
|
[19:57] pieterh
|
it'll become less confusing over time
|
[19:57] pieterh
|
a lot of change happening in a lot of places...
|
[19:58] pieterh
|
gimme 2 minutes...
|
[19:58] mikko
|
no hurry
|
[20:00] pieterh
|
mikko: ok, done, new version pushed
|
[20:00] mikko
|
kicking off a new build
|
[20:00] mikko
|
#4 on the way
|
[20:00] pieterh
|
:-)
|
[20:02] mikko
|
builds
|
[20:02] mikko
|
http://build.zero.mq/job/libzapi/4/cobertura/_default_/
|
[20:02] mikko
|
here is the code coverage
|
[20:04] mikko
|
i will refactor the builds as soon as the repository rename happens
|
[20:04] Guthur
|
pieterh, are you using ROUTER/DEALER in the guide
|
[20:04] mikko
|
so that i can do the changes in one go
|
[20:04] pieterh
|
Guthur: not yet, but that's the next step
|
[20:04] pieterh
|
then, move the C code over to using libzapi
|
[20:04] pieterh
|
mikko: sweet!
|
[20:05] mikko
|
zeromq2-2, is this a new branch as well?
|
[20:06] pieterh
|
mikko: yes, that's the packaging project for 2.2
|
[20:06] pieterh
|
the packaging projects will include more than libzmq, hopefully
|
[20:06] mikko
|
did my patch get through to the list ?
|
[20:06] pieterh
|
but they'll track the libzmq major/minor versions
|
[20:06] pieterh
|
yes, your patch made it
|
[20:06] mikko
|
cool, not very good connectivity out in the sticks
|
[20:06] pieterh
|
from the hot spas... :-)
|
[20:08] mikko
|
so, what is the role of zeromq2, zeromq2-2 and zeromq2-1 repos?
|
[20:08] pieterh
|
just for consistency, really
|
[20:08] pieterh
|
zeromq2 will be deprecated, become a map for visitors who use the old URI
|
[20:08] mikko
|
do we in the future push changes to upstream first?
|
[20:08] pieterh
|
2-1 and 2-2 are packaging projects, 2-2 will be where we add new projects like libzapi
|
[20:08] mikko
|
because that would be ideal
|
[20:09] pieterh
|
yes, if possible
|
[20:09] pieterh
|
sometimes it won't be possible
|
[20:09] pieterh
|
the 3.0 libzmq core will eventually change too much
|
[20:10] pieterh
|
we already had this case for one patch to 2.0, which had to be hand-made for that version
|
[20:10] mikko
|
something in this model feels very wrong but i really can't put my finger on it
|
[20:11] mikko
|
it feels like duplicating the effort in some ways
|
[20:11] pieterh
|
in fact it's not
|
[20:11] mikko
|
i made the openpgm build patches twice
|
[20:11] mikko
|
2-1 and upstream
|
[20:11] pieterh
|
yes, because you used pull requests to send to me
|
[20:11] pieterh
|
and sustrik does not accept anything except patches to ML
|
[20:12] pieterh
|
it would not change if we had one repo, two branches
|
[20:12] pieterh
|
the advantage is you were able to get rapid feedback that your changes worked
|
[20:12] mikko
|
so, we are still doing the patches on ML?
|
[20:12] pieterh
|
if you send upstream, you have no control over when they are released
|
[20:12] pieterh
|
i guess so, yes
|
[20:13] pieterh
|
I'd rather use the pull model explained on the contributing page
|
[20:13] pieterh
|
especially since that's how Sustriks sends me changes... :-/
|
[20:14] pieterh
|
basically, any contributor has to convince the project owner to accept his patch
|
[20:14] pieterh
|
project owner can define how patches are submitted
|
[20:15] pieterh
|
and contributor is the one who stresses if project A and project B have different codebases
|
[20:15] Guthur
|
but is this not sort of fracturing zeromq too much
|
[20:15] pieterh
|
nah
|
[20:15] mikko
|
yes, it is
|
[20:15] Guthur
|
projects with in a project
|
[20:15] pieterh
|
libzmq != ZeroMQ
|
[20:15] mikko
|
this puts more pressure on contributors
|
[20:15] pieterh
|
yes, mikko, it does
|
[20:15] pieterh
|
but that's necessary if we're not to have bottlenecks
|
[20:16] mikko
|
we already have massive bottlenecks
|
[20:16] pieterh
|
yes, but this is one big one removed
|
[20:16] mikko
|
we have three separate branches as three separate projects
|
[20:16] pieterh
|
that's not a bottleneck...
|
[20:16] mikko
|
every contributor has to mix and match their patches
|
[20:16] mikko
|
and only one person can accept that patch
|
[20:17] pieterh
|
sorry, this isn't accurate, mikko
|
[20:17] mikko
|
if that person is on hols your patch is sitting and waiting somewhere
|
[20:17] pieterh
|
this is standard with Git
|
[20:17] pieterh
|
you send patches or pull requests to a project maintainer
|
[20:17] mikko
|
no, it's not
|
[20:17] pieterh
|
you want everyone to commit to the repository?
|
[20:17] mikko
|
this is one possible workflow
|
[20:18] mikko
|
who do you mean by everyone?
|
[20:18] pieterh
|
it's the one that scales to many projects, because each one is smallish
|
[20:18] pieterh
|
and this only affects libzmq because it's got several incompatible versions
|
[20:18] pieterh
|
that is only one project out of 20 or 30
|
[20:20] pieterh
|
mikko: do you have an alternative proposal that lets us do what we want to do?
|
[20:21] mikko
|
currently we are doing everything very differently from what people contributing to open source are used to
|
[20:21] mikko
|
and that alienates contributors
|
[20:21] pieterh
|
that's true if you look at the core project but it's not true for the overall scheme
|
[20:22] pieterh
|
each project accepts contributors and contributions in its own way
|
[20:22] pieterh
|
this is consistent with how open source communities work
|
[20:22] pieterh
|
the only difference here is we have separate projects for *packaging* ZeroMQ
|
[20:22] pieterh
|
but that is necessary because libzmq != ZeroMQ
|
[20:23] pieterh
|
which will become much clearer once the core repo is renamed
|
[20:23] mikko
|
a contributor should not need to understand this amazing complex grand schema
|
[20:23] pieterh
|
well, we do have a lot of projects, how do you propose to map this?
|
[20:23] mikko
|
it should be as straigh-forward as: i run 2.1, find the git repo, make a patch
|
[20:24] pieterh
|
the packaging projects are largely hidden
|
[20:24] pieterh
|
make your patches against the libzmq git
|
[20:24] mikko
|
this should not be followed by having to understand that actually if my patch goes to libzmq i need to get it accepted to zeromq2-2 and zeromq2-1
|
[20:24] mikko
|
and possibly need to rework the patch for each version separately
|
[20:24] pieterh
|
well, fair enough, but understand that...
|
[20:25] pieterh
|
these repositories are for stabilization
|
[20:25] mikko
|
but they aren't
|
[20:25] pieterh
|
that means they only in theory get bug fixes or very safe functional changes
|
[20:25] mikko
|
we pushed openpgm build fixes straight to 2-1
|
[20:25] mikko
|
not through 'libzmq' repo
|
[20:25] pieterh
|
indeed, let's not do that again
|
[20:25] pieterh
|
however, realize that it's how you got those changes *tested* rapidly
|
[20:26] pieterh
|
next time, send to the ML
|
[20:26] Guthur
|
i've not really seen various version of a library being seen as projects
|
[20:26] pieterh
|
RHEL x.x?
|
[20:26] Guthur
|
if that happens they usually fork off and rename,
|
[20:26] Guthur
|
not familiar with RH to be honest
|
[20:27] pieterh
|
the linux kernel is repackaged in many distributions, each is a project
|
[20:27] Guthur
|
yes but are we not talking about the 'kernel' at the moment
|
[20:27] pieterh
|
well, libzmq is like the kernel for ZeroMQ
|
[20:28] pieterh
|
mikko: next time you send me a pull request for 2-1, I'll reject it, OK?
|
[20:28] Guthur
|
so 2, 2-1, 2-2 are distros?
|
[20:28] pieterh
|
yes, thank you
|
[20:28] pieterh
|
2 is not
|
[20:28] pieterh
|
2 is dead
|
[20:28] pieterh
|
will be dead once it's been renamed to libzmq
|
[20:29] Guthur
|
seems I a bit crazy to me, but i'm not overly experienced with these sort of things
|
[20:29] pieterh
|
there is no other way to create the freedom to make real packaging projects
|
[20:29] pieterh
|
it seems pretty clear to me
|
[20:29] pieterh
|
alternative is to all work in one repo, and have no packaging projects
|
[20:30] mikko
|
hahaha, you designed the schema
|
[20:30] mikko
|
of course it's clear to you
|
[20:30] pieterh
|
sure
|
[20:30] mikko
|
but from contributor's point of view the situation is not very good (imho)
|
[20:30] pieterh
|
well, it'll be clearer IMO when libzmq is properly named
|
[20:30] pieterh
|
"send your patch to the libzmq project"
|
[20:30] pieterh
|
and that can downstream to the various distros
|
[20:30] mikko
|
what happens when sustrik is on holidays?
|
[20:31] pieterh
|
ask him, I don't know
|
[20:31] pieterh
|
mikko: this is not a command-and-control model
|
[20:31] mikko
|
see, are we not creating massive bottlenecks?
|
[20:31] pieterh
|
propose an alternative to "person who knows the code real well"
|
[20:31] pieterh
|
we're not *creating* that bottleneck, it exists
|
[20:31] pieterh
|
seriously, your alternative is what, clone sustrik?
|
[20:32] pieterh
|
there are other people who know the core structures pretty well
|
[20:32] pieterh
|
if sustrik is unable to act as maintainer, I'm sure he'll delegate
|
[20:32] pieterh
|
but it is *his* responsibility
|
[20:32] pieterh
|
you and me can debate that for years, it matters not at all
|
[20:32] mikko
|
yes, what i don't get is this cycle:
|
[20:32] Guthur
|
could we not have the situation where the 'distros' start deviating quite far from the main dev branch
|
[20:33] pieterh
|
Guthur: unlikely, why would they?
|
[20:33] mikko
|
fork libzmq, create patch, commit, create signed patch, reset, wait for a merge, then pull down your own changes
|
[20:33] pieterh
|
the very point is that the people maintaining distros don't know the code
|
[20:33] Guthur
|
just curious really, they seemed to have become more than just previous versions
|
[20:33] pieterh
|
mikko: ack, it's complex and I don't like it
|
[20:33] Guthur
|
they seemed to have become their own projects
|
[20:34] mikko
|
forgot the "send mail to mailing-list" from that
|
[20:34] pieterh
|
Guthur: 'seem to' is mild, the goal was to create dependent projects
|
[20:34] pieterh
|
mikko: yes, I know
|
[20:34] pieterh
|
I've lobbied sustrik on this several times, here and on the list
|
[20:34] pieterh
|
next time, chime in, on the ML thread ... :-/
|
[20:35] mikko
|
i had forgotten about the ML patches already
|
[20:35] pieterh
|
I spent a lot of effort documenting alternative flows on the contributing page
|
[20:39] Guthur
|
pieterh, dependent or independent?
|
[20:40] pieterh
|
both :-)
|
[20:40] pieterh
|
look, 2-1 is not a good example, it's too young
|
[20:40] Guthur
|
though it already as deviation
|
[20:40] pieterh
|
2-2 will include, in my plans, libzmq, libzapi, the new C++ binding
|
[20:40] Guthur
|
where something needs forward ported
|
[20:40] pieterh
|
obviously it depends on those N projects
|
[20:41] Guthur
|
admittedly only a minor #define
|
[20:41] pieterh
|
yes
|
[20:41] pieterh
|
one way would be to use submodules and branches in the source repo
|
[20:41] pieterh
|
that would require that the branches are maintained in that repo
|
[20:42] pieterh
|
experience is that this wasn't happening, due to complexity of moving changes between branches (or somesuch)
|
[20:42] pieterh
|
lack of interest from main developers in maintaining branches
|
[20:42] mikko
|
it's the same amount of complexity as between different repos
|
[20:42] pieterh
|
yes
|
[20:43] pieterh
|
exactly, but with different repos, you can slice the work over several people much more easily
|
[20:43] pieterh
|
this is the key insight
|
[20:43] pieterh
|
collaborating inside one repo is really difficult
|
[20:43] pieterh
|
it demands agreement
|
[20:43] pieterh
|
clearly we don't get that easily
|
[20:43] Guthur
|
I thought git made it easier
|
[20:43] pieterh
|
it doesn't change people and make them less stubborn
|
[20:43] Guthur
|
certainly easier than the likes of SVN
|
[20:44] pieterh
|
git makes it easier to have many repos
|
[20:44] pieterh
|
indeed
|
[20:44] pieterh
|
git lets us solve the problem by slicing projects up, like I said on the ML, per ego
|
[20:44] pieterh
|
it's actually a really pleasant way to work
|
[20:44] Guthur
|
yeah, that discussion got a little out of hand
|
[20:45] Guthur
|
well it appeared so from an onlookers perspective
|
[20:45] pieterh
|
exactly, and that was the same last time we discussed multiple branches in the main repo
|
[20:46] pieterh
|
that was sometime in July iir, and my conclusion was "don't work in the core repo, ever"
|
[20:47] mikko
|
as the community grows an ideal process to me would be to have multiple people with commit access
|
[20:47] mikko
|
and each set of changes is mailed automatically to mailing-list
|
[20:47] pieterh
|
mikko: yes, probably a good model
|
[20:48] mikko
|
this also gives more visibility to changes going into repo and allows easily start conversation on mailing-list
|
[20:48] pieterh
|
however, I'm not going to raise this discussion for libzmq
|
[20:49] pieterh
|
you already have committer access to libzapi and libzfl
|
[20:50] Guthur
|
libzmq is the heart of it all though, and so the most important
|
[20:50] mikko
|
yes
|
[20:50] mikko
|
for example now i would be keen on getting coverage into libzmq
|
[20:50] pieterh
|
yes
|
[20:50] mikko
|
but it's futile to work on the stuff before openpgm patch has been merged
|
[20:51] pieterh
|
mikko: my experience contributing to core has been quite negative, I have to admit
|
[20:51] mikko
|
i don't even know if rebase works well on that cycle
|
[20:51] mikko
|
as in, when i pull back the changes merged by sustrik does that conflict with my local changes?
|
[20:51] mikko
|
or is it the same commit?
|
[20:52] pieterh
|
depends how you do it IMO
|
[20:58] pieterh
|
Guthur: OK, I'm able to inline the main language, the page is slow but loads
|
[21:00] Seta00
|
pieterh: the libzapi project file is broken
|
[21:00] pieterh
|
Seta00: yes, I've not tested it yet on MSVC
|
[21:01] pieterh
|
do you want to try fixing it and sending a patch?
|
[21:01] Seta00
|
yes
|
[21:01] pieterh
|
it's a copy of the libzfl project file, but obviously refers to the wrong sources & includes
|
[21:01] pieterh
|
thanks! :-)
|
[21:06] pieterh
|
g'night folks, I need to crash, early morning tomorrow
|
[21:06] Seta00
|
pieterh: just a small question before you go, if you have to include non-standard headers to the project, where should they go? on the standard include directory?
|
[21:06] Seta00
|
(MSVC doesn't have inttypes.h)
|
[21:07] Seta00
|
but there's https://code.google.com/p/msinttypes/
|
[21:07] pieterh
|
Seta00: hmm, edit zapi_prelude.h to include the right files and move the existing include to one of the #if UNIX blocks
|
[21:07] Seta00
|
okay thanks
|
[21:07] pieterh
|
there's a section in the doc on Porting libzapi, may be helpful
|
[21:39] Seta00
|
apparently msvc has no implementation of sigaction
|
[21:39] Seta00
|
:(
|
[21:42] JusticeFries
|
what are the differences in typical use cases for 0mq vs something like rabbitmq?
|
[23:05] klestes
|
hello, is anyone talking today ?
|
[23:19] klestes
|
if anyone does see this, what is the best way to interoperate with channels in basic (non 0MQ) tcp ? do you have to write a custom gateway, TCP <--> 0MQ, or is there a better solution inherent in 0MQ that I've missed ?
|
[23:20] jdroid-
|
i've been using zmq with python and am trying to compile some stuff with c now, but I keep getting errors.
|
[23:20] jdroid-
|
does this make sense to anyone? http://pastebin.com/7Mj5KSSH
|
[23:21] jdroid-
|
here's the code: http://pastebin.com/efKgRJiK
|
[23:21] klestes
|
you have to program a lot lower with C than with python - how would you say the experience has been using python with 0MQ ?
|
[23:22] jdroid-
|
The experience with python has been awesome so far. Very easy.
|
[23:22] jdroid-
|
I built a Mongrel2 handler with eventlet and zeromq recently. github.com/j2labs/brubeck
|
[23:23] jdroid-
|
I've been posting a few pyzmq examples to github as it comes up in conversation, but I want to add a multilang example AND get back in C doing it.
|
[23:23] jdroid-
|
https://github.com/j2labs/zmq_examples
|
[23:23] klestes
|
after learning Perl, my goal is never go back to C! Evah !
|
[23:24] jdroid-
|
After learning Perl, I vowed never to go back to Perl. So right back atcha buddy!
|
[23:24] jdroid-
|
:)
|
[23:24] klestes
|
also you might want to check out the new zapi. Hintjen is very excited about it, so it could be big.
|
[23:25] klestes
|
well, I'm not going to stir up a fight. I have a lot of respect for Python, and might be doing some work in it soon myself.
|
[23:26] klestes
|
my point was to be, programming 0MQ in either python or perl is much easier than C, IMHO.
|
[23:26] jdroid-
|
Well I'm only kidding anyway. Perl is a fine language if you're working with people who respect others. :)
|
[23:28] klestes
|
It has its warts, and its uhm, non warty really ok type features.
|
[23:28] klestes
|
I get sick of all those $ signs all the time, esp. since its been a while since I've seen $$$$ !
|
[23:29] jdroid-
|
You'll dig python then I'm sure. The code is generally as easy to read as people say.
|
[23:29] jdroid-
|
But anyway... I'm trying to get some c compiled!
|
[23:29] klestes
|
I looked at your code, but not being in C for at least a decade, I couildn't catch anything right off the bat. I know its either a linking issue, or maybe forgetting to include a header (but you seem to have done that right)
|
[23:30] klestes
|
what compiler are you using, Gcc ?
|
[23:31] jdroid-
|
oh great question actually... i'm using the gcc xcode gave me
|
[23:31] jdroid-
|
seems to compile mongrel2 just fine, so i figure i've got my args wrong somehow
|
[23:31] jdroid-
|
gcc 4.2.1 specifically tho
|
[23:31] klestes
|
uhm, xcode - are you on OS/X ?
|
[23:31] jdroid-
|
yep
|
[23:31] klestes
|
lucky guy !
|
[23:32] jdroid-
|
i guess..? macs are cheap these days
|
[23:32] klestes
|
someday I'm gonna go mac...and never come back.
|
[23:32] klestes
|
well, depends on what kinda mac you want. the one I want is 2.5 - 3k.
|
[23:34] klestes
|
try compiling and linking one of the simple examples from the guide. do you get the same errors ?
|
[23:35] jdroid-
|
i seem to get the same errrors
|
[23:35] jdroid-
|
hmm
|
[23:36] jdroid-
|
i tried this: http://zguide.zeromq.org/c:hwclient
|
[23:38] jdroid-
|
ah got it
|
[23:39] jdroid-
|
i forgot -lzmq at the end of the gcc cmd
|
[23:39] JusticeFries
|
what is the difference in typical use case for 0mq versus something in the realm of rabbitmq?
|
[23:40] jdroid-
|
JusticeFries: I think the mistake there is assuming zmq is a replacement for rabbitmq
|
[23:40] JusticeFries
|
nope
|
[23:40] JusticeFries
|
not assuming replacement.
|
[23:40] JusticeFries
|
i'm interested in how they complement each other, too. :)
|
[23:40] JusticeFries
|
and what each one excels at.
|
[23:40] jdroid-
|
:)
|
[23:41] jdroid-
|
So ZMQ is more like sockets with messaging semantics. You'd still build your broker, which might be dropping stuff from one zmq socket in a db, while sending stuff out of the db across another socket
|
[23:41] JusticeFries
|
okay.
|
[23:42] JusticeFries
|
unix sockets, or something more specific to ZMQ?
|
[23:42] jdroid-
|
Zmq offers multiple types of sockets.
|
[23:42] JusticeFries
|
fair enough.
|
[23:42] jdroid-
|
You could use unix sockets if you want. You could use tcp just as easily
|
[23:43] JusticeFries
|
so then - I'm looking at doing something that settles somewhere near rabbit's topic exchanges. basically, using it for some group messaging functions for end users that doesn't hit the DB.
|
[23:43] klestes
|
I've heard that rabbitMQ is somewhat synergetic with ZMQ, it can be made into a broker.
|
[23:44] JusticeFries
|
i've heard that too.
|
[23:44] klestes
|
we musta read the same article ;)_
|
[23:44] JusticeFries
|
just not sure where to fit it in, or if it is even useful in this current context.
|
[23:44] jdroid-
|
what you heard is probably that zeromq has amqp support: http://www.zeromq.org/docs:welcome-from-amqp
|
[23:44] JusticeFries
|
either that or ilya's blog.
|
[23:45] JusticeFries
|
igvita
|
[23:45] JusticeFries
|
heh I like the gross generalizations.
|
[23:45] jdroid-
|
thanks. i'm the James Dennis that's quoted!
|
[23:45] klestes
|
yeah, he does that well :)
|
[23:45] JusticeFries
|
ha nice.
|
[23:46] klestes
|
its a small 0world after all.
|
[23:46] JusticeFries
|
well i may assault you with questions later - though the guide is pretty extensive
|
[23:46] klestes
|
0mq used to - didn't they chunk the amqp thang ?
|
[23:46] klestes
|
yeah, and it seems to be getting biggeer and betta' all the time...
|