[zeromq-dev] ZeroMq 2.1.7 "memory leak"

[john skaller]

On 22/02/2012, at 12:49 AM, Jess Morecroft wrote:

>  My suspicion is
> that a temporary solution of high water-marks, replaced by a proper
> solution of using 0mq 3.1 once stable, is probably the way forward.


Whether or not using high water marks is a temporary solution,
shouldn't you always have them?

Everything in production code should be bounded, even if the
bounds are large.

--
john skaller
skaller at users.sourceforge.net