[zeromq-dev] Thoughts on Linux End User Summit

Martin Sustrik sustrik at 250bpm.com
Tue Dec 1 11:53:14 CET 2009

Steven McCoy wrote:
> 2009/11/27 Martin Sustrik <sustrik at 250bpm.com <mailto:sustrik at 250bpm.com>>
>     Any thoughts on the issue anybody? Is there a section of messaging
>     functionality that would benefit from being moved down to the kernel?
>     Any experience with that kind of thing anybody?
> I'm tempted to try out the recvmmsg() patch, similarly all the 
> openonload stuff looks good but it's limited to one vendors NIC.
> http://vger.kernel.org/netconf2009_slides/recvmmsg.pdf
> It's looks like it's making it's way up to the real kernel as the author 
> is a RedHat guy,
> http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/63763/
> The PGM protocol would see great performance if repairs could be handled 
> within kernel space, i.e. lock the transmit window into the kernel and 
> reduce context switches and kernel-user memory conversions.
> I wonder if this means RedHat have their own PGM implementation being 
> tested internally for MRG.

Highly improbable IMO. Qpid guys never showed any interest in multicast. 
My guess would be that the patch is driven directly by the needs of 
financial community rather than the needs of Qpid team.


More information about the zeromq-dev mailing list