[zeromq-dev] Theoretical whitepaper on 0MQ

Fabien Niñoles fabien.ninoles at gmail.com
Fri Jul 8 05:24:47 CEST 2011

2011/7/7 Ian Barber <ian.barber at gmail.com>:
> As far as I can see the load balancing behavior will break the interjection
> principle - if I have 1 client pushing to three nodes, and I put 2 behind an
> intermediary, as in the example, I will increase the share of the load on
> the 1st (still directly connected) node from 33% to 50%. It would seem
> possible to have a kind of XPULL/XPUSH socket type may have the ability to
> be informed of availability, similarly to the subscription chaining in XPUB,
> to allow more accurate distribution - though this could be one of those
> ideas that's very bad in practice!

I am working on another pattern (the Collector or Surveyor pattern)
and this kind of informations is also required at some points if I
want better performance.  Right now, I collecting it by requesting the
workers to declare themself, but this create a lot of limitation in
the pattern.

However, in both my case and the push/pull case, it really doesn't
matter much if you set your HWM accordingly...  The lb would react
correctly in this case.  Also, keep in mind that if your pusher is
connect to 10 local end point and one proxy that access 1000 other
endpoints, you're proxy would became the bottleneck leaving your local
endpoints mostly idle.  So, may be it's not the kind of behavior you


More information about the zeromq-dev mailing list