[zeromq-dev] Talk about ZeroMQ

andrea crotti andrea.crotti.0 at gmail.com
Mon Oct 1 15:09:34 CEST 2012

2012/9/30 Pieter Hintjens <ph at imatix.com>:
> Yes, these are the standard questions. To which, some standard answers:
>> - persistence
> There's no one ideal persistence solution. Build what you need
> according to the use-case or take 0MQ packages like Majordomo.
>> - security
> There's no one ideal security solution. Pre-shared symmetric keys work
> well for pub-sub (see SALT), SASL for connected protocols (see
> FileMQ).
>> - the crossroads.io fork
> A valuable lesson in the power of a community (or, how individual ego
> and talent really doesn't count for much).
>> - reliability
> There is no one answer to reliability, there are dozens of different
> cases, each has different optimal solutions. Ch4 of the Guide, etc.
>> - how can it be faster than TCP
> Wrong question; you can make highly optimized TCP apps (that do things
> like lock-free queues, batching, etc.) at great cost and you can make
> slow ones more cheaply. 0MQ gives you optimization cheaply. So it's
> faster than slower TCP apps. but not faster than TCP.

Thanks, I should have known them earlier, but well I gave some
sufficient answers anyway..

But after the talk I realised something about reliability.

I would like to send results from multiple workers to multiple
subscribers, but being sure that all the messages are received.

If I use PUB/SUB some messages might get lost in case a subscriber is
not active, and with PUSH/PULL only one client would get the message.

So what's the possible solution for this?


More information about the zeromq-dev mailing list