3 ms·

Thanks for the comment. If you use the right devices, you do not really need "a dozen" more sockets for HA. But your justification why you prefer HAProxy is wha

by Loic 15y ago

Thanks for the comment. If you use the right devices, you do not really need "a dozen" more sockets for HA. But your justification why you prefer HAProxy is what really matters. Every technology is applied in a given context and your context — cloud with a finite number of ports you need not to waste — makes everything clear. Note that I was contacted a week ago to comment on this project and my comment was basically interesting and looks good but this HAProxy thing does not ring ok. So really, add the context in your readme, you will clear a lot of confusion for people used to ZMQ.

bombela 15y ago
Added to the already long todo ;) Thanks for the feedback. I also believe that it is not possible to build some sort of connected stream between a DEALER and a ROUTER socket if the DEALER round-robing behind your back. ZMQ 3.0 was giving the tool to use a DEALER in a more router fashioned way, sadly, it got removed in 3.1...
beagle3 15y ago
> If you use the right devices, you do not really need "a dozen" more sockets for HA. Would you be able to post a short write up about how to achieve that within the ZeroMQ framework?
- Loic 15y ago
  Why not, I added it on my list of things to write about. Thank you.