5 ms·
> were zeromq's queues just in-memory? Yes. > it was never meant to be reliable in the sense that messages were preserved in a database at each socket, was it
by gnaritas 13y ago
> were zeromq's queues just in-memory?
Yes.
> it was never meant to be reliable in the sense that messages were preserved in a database at each socket, was it?
No. It's meant to be a fast inter app messaging protocol, it's not a queue, it simply uses some in memory queues internally. It's not a queue, it's an improved socket library, having MQ in the name was clearly a mistake that he's now corrected.
- sophacles 13y agoOr the whole name 0mq can be read to mean no message queue. Which in context of middleware makes sense
- gnaritas 13y agoIt can be, but it generally isn't, look around the net and you'll see it's pretty clear that most think it's a message queue and it gets thrown into that mix when the topic comes up. People are always having to explain to others that it isn't a queue, that's bad naming of the product.