[zeromq-dev] zmq performance tuning and clrzmq in linux

Johnny Gozde johnny at jgoz.net
Thu Jun 14 17:33:46 CEST 2012

Hi Anton,

On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 7:09 AM, anti_tenzor <anti_tenzor at mail.ru> wrote:

> **
> 1. I have measured performance for *in-proc* versus *local tcp* for small
> byte arrays and found in-proc method to be 50 times faster. Here I'd like
> to ask is
> there any additional performance tweaks for in-proc and tcp protocols?

I'm assuming this is a test you ran on Windows. Currently, ZMQ is limited
to using select() on Windows for the TCP transport. select() on Windows has
a bunch of limitations and is very slow, so your options may be limited as
far as ZMQ tweaks for TCP.

> 2. It's a pity zmq doesn't support inter-proc communication for windows.
> Afaik there is "named pipe" as the most close analogue. Since it is
> communication
> inside one OS, different IPC implementations should not be compatible in
> different OSes. Is there any plans to cover this feature in observable
> future?

I can't answer this definitively, but search this mailing list for topics
around IOCP (I/O Completion Ports). It's gets discussed every few months -
basically, if ZMQ could be patched to support IOCP, then the Windows
performance numbers would make a huge leap and IPC (via named pipes) would
be supported.

> 3. I've managed to compile zmq for ubuntu and I'd like to test it with
> ClrZmq (with Mono). Currently I receive DllNotFoundException (for dll
> kernel32).
> ClrZmq is v3.0-alfa. Is there any guide how to configure and how to use
> ClrZmq in Linux? Is it possible for some earlier version of ClrZmq?

There is a section in the clrzmq readme on Mono builds:

If you have further questions after reading this, don't hesitate to ask.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.zeromq.org/pipermail/zeromq-dev/attachments/20120614/2306a6cd/attachment.htm>

More information about the zeromq-dev mailing list