[zeromq-dev] Q: type-tagging messages - prefix an uint32 or a frame?

[Евгений Пастернак]

Hello Michael !

In my project I tried to use (1), but later changed to 2-nd approach. And
now I more happy )
(2) simplier to log and debug especially 32/64 bit issues.
In my project there is no any significant lack of performance.


Regards
Eugene Pasternak

2015-06-19 20:00 GMT+06:00 Michael Haberler <mail17 at mah.priv.at>:

> so far we are using protobuf for serialization, with a single protobuf
> message being the supertype and container of all possible other message
> contents
>
> we are switching to tagging - each frame has a 32bit-sized tag which
> encodes message type *), as well as message encoding
>
> so we have two options:
>
> (1) just prefix each message (whatever type/encoding) with the tag, in a
> single frame
> (2) prepend a 4-byte frame with the tag, which says how to interpret the
> following frame
>
>
> (2) would be easier to autodetect for backwards compatibility, at the cost
> of extra ZMTP framing overhead
> (1) would need a heuristic test which I dislike
>
> any suggestions one way or the other?
> are there any significant runtime performance implications of using (2)?
>
> thanks,
>
> - Michael
>
>
>
>
> *) since protobuf lacks a message type ID, Petteri Aimonen and me came up
> with the msgid option in the .proto spec, see
> https://github.com/nanopb/nanopb/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=msgid
> this could be useful for other protobuf users as message type ID's are a
> recurring question
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> zeromq-dev mailing list
> zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
>



-- 
Пастернак Евгений Анатольевич,
8-962-033-95-11
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.zeromq.org/pipermail/zeromq-dev/attachments/20150629/a2a6b3d3/attachment.htm>