5 ms·
I'm the primary author (formerly Which Linden). Surprised to see this pop up here after all this time! We wrote this almost three years ago, and at the time Z
by rdw 15y ago
I'm the primary author (formerly Which Linden). Surprised to see this pop up here after all this time!
We wrote this almost three years ago, and at the time ZeroMQ was substantially less mature than it is now. In particular, the Python bindings were broken, weren't maintained by the ZeroMQ organization, and there was no indication they'd be production-ready by the time we needed it (which would have been within the next month or two).
More importantly, we were looking for something that handled our use case a little bit more fully. Our message-rate requirements were laughably small, so what we really wanted was software that gave us an "inbox" for each of millions of users. We also weren't looking forward to implementing failover, consistency, and sharding from scratch.
Edit: corrected timeline.
- fzzzy 15y agoHi rdw! What are you up to now? I don't have any contact info for you and haven't seen you on irc in forever. (You might not recognize this nick, this is Donovan)
- pavlov 15y agoThanks for the explanation!
- DEinspanjer 15y agoDo you know what they ended up settling on?
- rdw 15y agoNo out-of-the-box solution was used. The system remained a menagerie of different messaging techniques (database, udp, in-memory storage), and the company just spent time improving the reliability and performance of these existing systems individually.