3 ms·
ok, i am a bit clueless here, but if 0mq has no persistance, how is it reliable (durable)? or, if it's not reliable (durable), isn't this whole debate comparin
by andrewcooke 17y ago
ok, i am a bit clueless here, but if 0mq has no persistance, how is it reliable (durable)? or, if it's not reliable (durable), isn't this whole debate comparing apples and oranges?
[edited to clarify i am talking about durability and not just reliability in the tcp sense]
- rbranson 17y agoIt is reliable in the sense that it can deliver messages between two peers reliably, like TCP. What you're speaking of is durability.
- dschobel 17y agoYou are correct, there is no persistence. 0MQ is basically just a step above socket level communications, while obviating all of the tedious BS socket programming forces you to do. Here's a good intro to 0MQ from lwn.net, along with sample code: http://lwn.net/Articles/370307/ http://lwn.net/Articles/370307/
- andrewcooke 17y agothanks. this seems an awful lot like the nosql "debate" in that the two "sides" (typically) have different priorities (and the differences are similar, related to consistency and scaling). [and also makes imatix not look that good, if any customers need the durability part, which is quite a common requirement]