nanomsg

gleicon · 2014-10-31T07:30:36+00:00

On 10/29/2014 04:44 AM, Vladislav Manchev wrote: > > Keep in mind that you'll get the overhead of an extra syscall each time > though. Yep- that's...

nanomsg

gleicon

Hello, have anyone used nanomsg and openresty ? Any remarks/recommendations ? I'm not sure that the current lua bindings will work because they are FFI. Thanks !

aapo.talvensaari

On Friday, 31 October 2014 01:30:36 UTC+2, Gleicon Moraes wrote:

Hello, have anyone used nanomsg and openresty ? Any remarks/recommendations ? I'm not sure that the current lua bindings will work because they are FFI. Thanks !

I have been looking at this. The main problem is that the transport layer is integrated in nanomsg, and that could cause problems in contest of OpenResty (e.g. it should be reimplemented in a non-blocking fashion using ngx.socket.*). I'm not sure if it is a lot of work.

manchev

Last time I checked, the FFI binding was blocking the whole worker miserably.

I think it's a problem of how nanomsg itself is implemented as Aapo pointed out.

You would need to take out the transport layer handling out of nanomsg in order to be able to use the cosockets API instead, which will fix the issue presumably.

Don't take my words at face value though -- I haven't looked into this recently, so check the code for yourself.

Best,
Vladislav

On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 9:44 AM, Aapo Talvensaari <aapo.ta...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, 31 October 2014 01:30:36 UTC+2, Gleicon Moraes wrote:
Hello, have anyone used nanomsg and openresty ? Any remarks/recommendations ? I'm not sure that the current lua bindings will work because they are FFI. Thanks !

I have been looking at this. The main problem is that the transport layer is integrated in nanomsg, and that could cause problems in contest of OpenResty (e.g. it should be reimplemented in a non-blocking fashion using ngx.socket.*). I'm not sure if it is a lot of work.

.

gleicon

I see. Had the same issue on go until a native implementation (native meaning in Go) took out the .so requirement. Both nanomsg or zmq would help, as any other small messaging system as I plan to port some front end apps to openresty and they communicate through small messages to a backend. Thanks for the heads up.

On Friday, October 31, 2014 8:20:47 AM UTC-2, Vladislav Manchev wrote:

Last time I checked, the FFI binding was blocking the whole worker miserably.

I think it's a problem of how nanomsg itself is implemented as Aapo pointed out.

You would need to take out the transport layer handling out of nanomsg in order to be able to use the cosockets API instead, which will fix the issue presumably.

Don't take my words at face value though -- I haven't looked into this recently, so check the code for yourself.

Best,
Vladislav

On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 9:44 AM, Aapo Talvensaari <aapo.tal...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, 31 October 2014 01:30:36 UTC+2, Gleicon Moraes wrote:
Hello, have anyone used nanomsg and openresty ? Any remarks/recommendations ? I'm not sure that the current lua bindings will work because they are FFI. Thanks !

I have been looking at this. The main problem is that the transport layer is integrated in nanomsg, and that could cause problems in contest of OpenResty (e.g. it should be reimplemented in a non-blocking fashion using ngx.socket.*). I'm not sure if it is a lot of work.

.

evan

You can use luajit-nanomsg asynchronously. You can get a pollable file descriptor from a nanomsg socket using getsockopt. I have not looked at the cosocket API or any other nginx integration mechanisms, but you would probably want to extract those pollable fds. Here's an example with epoll:

https://github.com/nanomsg/luajit-nanomsg/blob/master/examples/epoll_integration.lua#L21

-Evan

On Friday, October 31, 2014 6:20:47 AM UTC-4, Vladislav Manchev wrote:

Last time I checked, the FFI binding was blocking the whole worker miserably.

I think it's a problem of how nanomsg itself is implemented as Aapo pointed out.

You would need to take out the transport layer handling out of nanomsg in order to be able to use the cosockets API instead, which will fix the issue presumably.

Don't take my words at face value though -- I haven't looked into this recently, so check the code for yourself.

Best,
Vladislav

On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 9:44 AM, Aapo Talvensaari <aapo.tal...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, 31 October 2014 01:30:36 UTC+2, Gleicon Moraes wrote:
Hello, have anyone used nanomsg and openresty ? Any remarks/recommendations ? I'm not sure that the current lua bindings will work because they are FFI. Thanks !

I have been looking at this. The main problem is that the transport layer is integrated in nanomsg, and that could cause problems in contest of OpenResty (e.g. it should be reimplemented in a non-blocking fashion using ngx.socket.*). I'm not sure if it is a lot of work.

.

gleicon

will give it a try but I'm not that familiar with cosockets too. thanks for the heads up !

On Tuesday, November 4, 2014 1:57:34 PM UTC-2, Evan Wies wrote:

You can use luajit-nanomsg asynchronously. You can get a pollable file descriptor from a nanomsg socket using getsockopt. I have not looked at the cosocket API or any other nginx integration mechanisms, but you would probably want to extract those pollable fds. Here's an example with epoll:

https://github.com/nanomsg/luajit-nanomsg/blob/master/examples/epoll_integration.lua#L21

-Evan

On Friday, October 31, 2014 6:20:47 AM UTC-4, Vladislav Manchev wrote:
Last time I checked, the FFI binding was blocking the whole worker miserably.

I think it's a problem of how nanomsg itself is implemented as Aapo pointed out.

You would need to take out the transport layer handling out of nanomsg in order to be able to use the cosockets API instead, which will fix the issue presumably.

Don't take my words at face value though -- I haven't looked into this recently, so check the code for yourself.

Best,
Vladislav

On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 9:44 AM, Aapo Talvensaari <aapo.tal...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, 31 October 2014 01:30:36 UTC+2, Gleicon Moraes wrote:
Hello, have anyone used nanomsg and openresty ? Any remarks/recommendations ? I'm not sure that the current lua bindings will work because they are FFI. Thanks !

I have been looking at this. The main problem is that the transport layer is integrated in nanomsg, and that could cause problems in contest of OpenResty (e.g. it should be reimplemented in a non-blocking fashion using ngx.socket.*). I'm not sure if it is a lot of work.

.