4 ms·
It doesn't use UDP. So my tongue-in-cheek reply is, it doesn't qualify to have "blazing" in the name. Hopefully that's not just funny inside my own head. :) ht
by notjoemama 3y ago
It doesn't use UDP. So my tongue-in-cheek reply is, it doesn't qualify to have "blazing" in the name. Hopefully that's not just funny inside my own head. :)
https://bloomberg.github.io/blazingmq/docs/architecture/network_transport/ https://bloomberg.github.io/blazingmq/docs/architecture/netw...
- rewmie 3y ago> It doesn't use UDP. So my tongue-in-cheek reply is, it doesn't qualify to have "blazing" in the name. Arguably, if you start with UDP but you also need to ensure retransmission and reordering, you eventually end up reimplementing TCP but poorly.
- jayd16 3y agoI guess you could implement QUIC instead.
- lordnacho 3y agoCheck out Aeron, they have a way to multicast (thus UDP) reliably and ordered. Based on negative acks. Super fast.
- HappySweeney 3y agoNORM from the Naval Research Labs is another implementation of the same concept. https://github.com/USNavalResearchLaboratory/norm https://github.com/USNavalResearchLaboratory/norm
- jonathanoliver 3y agoAeron is another awesome project from Martin Thompson (Disruptor, Simple Binary Encoding, Mechanical Sympathy, etc.). That guy really knows his stuff regarding performance.
- phishhook 3y agoSounds like PGM
- lordnacho 3y agoSimilar ideas, yes. But somehow I found Aeron and got it to work, not so straightforward with PGM. Been a while now, so not sure about the details.
- anonymoushn 3y agoI've found that for many applications TCP doesn't really make optimal choices in these areas or expose knobs for users to make better choices.
- amanj41 3y agoWhen I was working at BB I could have sworn they had a fanout mode using UDP. Guess not.