Re: [Soc-coordination] GSoC project: fedmsg for the Debian infrastructure
- To: Simon Chopin <chopin.simon@gmail.com>
- Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian-services-admin@lists.debian.org, rbean@redhat.com, debian-admin@lists.debian.org, soc-coordination@lists.alioth.debian.org
- Subject: Re: [Soc-coordination] GSoC project: fedmsg for the Debian infrastructure
- From: Peter Palfrader <weasel@debian.org>
- Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 22:49:36 +0200
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20130425204936.GS23110@anguilla.noreply.org>
- Mail-followup-to: Simon Chopin <chopin.simon@gmail.com>, debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian-services-admin@lists.debian.org, rbean@redhat.com, debian-admin@lists.debian.org, soc-coordination@lists.alioth.debian.org
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20130425194915.21764.17168@mithrandir>
- References: <[🔎] 20130425115056.21764.39271@mithrandir> <[🔎] 20130425191729.GA6164@varinia.lobefin.net> <[🔎] 20130425194915.21764.17168@mithrandir>
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013, Simon Chopin wrote:
> > One of the principles, up to now, of system design for the debian.org
> > infrastructure has been that it can tolerate single nodes being off line
> > for periods of time. My understanding of ZeroMQ is that it doesn't do
> > very well when the sender and the receiver aren't on line at the same
> > time. I have not used ZeroMQ in any serious way, so I'm only repeating
> > what I've heard. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
>
> Well, as I understand it, when sender or receiver are not online, there
> is simply no message passing. If your concern is about what happens to
> the backlog when the consumer comes back online, then I've already
> written about that earlier today :-)
Does that imply you expect us to run services on core infrastructure
machines that listen to the world?
Cheers,
weasel
--
| .''`. ** Debian **
Peter Palfrader | : :' : The universal
http://www.palfrader.org/ | `. `' Operating System
| `- http://www.debian.org/
Reply to: