[zeromq-dev] Comparing OpenDDS and ZeroMQ Usage and Performance

Martin Sustrik sustrik at 250bpm.com
Fri Jun 25 11:06:03 CEST 2010


Peter,

> On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 3:55 AM, Martin Sustrik <sustrik at 250bpm.com> wrote:
>> This regression results from removing some kernel-bypass functionality
>> (namely lock-free polling) in exchange for more functionality (namely
>> allowing for more than 63 threads to use 0MQ sockets).
>> 
> Just out of curiosity, If a regression is involved for an off hand use
> case (more than 63 threads), why not have this as an optional
> configuration flag prior to compiling.

The change cuts through the most of 0MQ codebase. Thus you would end up 
with virtually maintaining two separate codebases.

Moreover, lock-free polling doesn't provide enough functionality to 
implement zmq_poll so this function would have to be disabled in the 
"optimised" branch.

Also, you would have to specify number of threads you are going to use 
0MQ from in advance (this has API implications).

Finally, the work on migrating 0MQ sockets between OS threads that's 
going on now wouldn't be possible with the lock-free polling.

All in all, if someone feels that maintaining a highly optimised but 
less functional version of 0MQ for Windows is worth of the effort, just 
go on!

Martin



More information about the zeromq-dev mailing list