[zeromq-dev] Efficiency for very few short messages

[Jason Smith]

Hi Dan,

Here's something I have found with your code. Testing here I see the same
speed up for all numbers of equations. I am using the release version of
the dll however. About to test the debug version of the dll to see if I get
different behaviour.

- J


On 23 January 2013 13:56, dan smith <dan25311 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Jason,
>
> Thanks a lot for taking a look at it.
>
> As for the "while(nfinish > 0" loop, my experience is that it does not
> have significant effect on the time. If I remove it and allow the threads
> to die, the difference is negligible. In the real application the threads
> needs to remain alive of course, I just tried to check that the thread
> closing is not the reason.
>
> Closing the sockets in threads might not be the reason either, a
> terminating message is sent back to the main thread before that.
>
> I use zeromq-3.2.2.
>
> In the real application I am sending a pointer, here the 8 As simulate
> that.
>
> I am looking forward to your further comments very much. Hope that I am
> the one who made some mistake and there is a solution for sending few small
> messages at the latency that I measured for large number of messages (that
> was under 1 microseconds which would be cool)
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 8:13 PM, Jason Smith <jason.nevar.smith at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>>
>> On 23 January 2013 11:42, dan smith <dan25311 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> while(nfinish > 0)
>>
>>
>> Haven't had a chance to compile this here. For some reason have a linker
>> issue on my work machine.
>>
>> At first glance the "while(nfinish > 0)" loop assumes sequential thread
>> completion for best time. For example you only know of thread 7
>> finishing only until 1 through to 6 have completed. Don't know if this is
>> affecting things drastically or not. Maybe switching to polling here and
>> updating a "completed" vector list might work better.
>>
>> Another area I would look into is the linger of the sockets, it shouldn't
>> affect closing them down within the thread however its something to
>> consider.
>>
>> When I get a chance I would be looking to place more asserts in to make
>> sure messages were doing what I thought they were (send and receive calls
>> return values). Then I would be checking the timing of any close down code.
>>
>> Hope this helps in the meantime.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> zeromq-dev mailing list
>> zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
>> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> zeromq-dev mailing list
> zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.zeromq.org/pipermail/zeromq-dev/attachments/20130129/5f58acd8/attachment.htm>