[zeromq-dev] Alternative efficiency design of lbbroker

[Pieter Hintjens]

> In any case, does what I am thinking about work?

It's usually a good idea to make small pieces, and grow your
understanding of your problem and alternative solutions like that.
No-one here can do that for you.

On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 7:31 AM, Kenneth Adam Miller
<kennethadammiller at gmail.com> wrote:
> Instead of routing all information through the broker and requiring an
> intermediary hop, I'd like to consider an approach where the address
> information that the req socket parses out on the side that first sends
> ready is used in order to manage a simple mutual connection facilitator in
> ZMQ...
>
> Just like with load balancing broker from the manual, I have two parties
> that mutually require one another. But I want to do simply a request to the
> broker and receive the information I need in order to send directly to the
> other entity.
>
> With router sockets, I get the address in a empty delimited set of message
> sending convention. What I don't know is if I add a router socket to each
> mutually requiring party, and -even if party A is not connected even to
> party B- use the address information attained from the broker to send on
> party A's router socket to party B and vice versa. Is this the best way to
> do this? I don't want to manage a set of connected sockets.
>
> I realize that party A may have individual 1 and party B an individual 2
> where 1 & 2 repeatedly make connection over broker-I want to keep using
> broker anyway, because broker allows each party to know when an individual
> is ready in each. So the 1& 2 scenario is coincidental.
>
> But what I don't think is a good design idea is having a socket that makes
> connect/close calls between each iteration to the broker or the idea of
> having each endpoint know it's hostname or something (possibly I have
> premature misgivings).
>
> In any case, does what I am thinking about work? Reading the target address
> information gained from a router object and feeding it to a completely
> different router object (where individual 1 may not have ever had his router
> connected to individual 2 before)?
>
> _______________________________________________
> zeromq-dev mailing list
> zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
>