the FD must be read-only, it might be possible in some OS but I won't be portable.
Regarding the Command FD, it must be used, otherwise the Recv/Send FD won't work. So in your case you need to be add the event-loop both the command FD (which is the regular FD) and Recv/Send FD. When command FD is signaled you must call zmq_process_comands, which currently doesn't exist. When recv/send FD is signaled you can call recv/send. zmq_process_command it what causing the other FDs to get signaled. The bottom line, this is kind of syntactic sugar, it will be the equivalent of calling has_in or has_out immediately after FD is signaled and only then call recv/send. On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 5:54 PM, MinRK <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 4:19 PM, Doron Somech <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The FD today is signalled when ever a command should be processes. What >> we can do is split it to 3 different FD: >> >> * Command FD : The one being used right now, this still must be used, >> when ever signalled call process commands (which we should expose in API). >> * Recv FD: use as level triggered to receive. >> * Send FD: use as level triggered to send. >> >> Only issue with this solution, you should include in your event loop >> minimum two FD, one for processing commands and one for send/ recv. >> > I think two FDs would be fine; certainly better than what we have now. It > would eliminate the significant problem of one signal for separate events. > Perhaps this is a naïve question: Is it not possible to have an FD signal > writable when the socket becomes writable and readable when the socket > becomes readable? If they both have to be read-only FDs, that seems fine, > as long as the signaling for send and recv are separated somehow. I'm not > sure what users would do with the Command FD. > > -MinRK > > >> For thread safe sockets this is a little simpler as we can make one FD >> for all sockets for processing commands. >> On Jan 22, 2016 2:52 PM, "Pieter Hintjens" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Yes, the edge triggered FD in libzmq has been a constant source of >>> annoyance. Maybe someone on this list knows how to fix it. >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 1:40 PM, MinRK <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > Hi all, >>> > >>> > I've implemented yet another eventloop integration in pyzmq (asyncio, >>> this >>> > time), and this is only nontrivial because of the edge-triggered >>> read-only >>> > zmq.FD. Integrating into existing eventloops would be much easier if >>> we had >>> > a more traditional level-triggered FD to work with. >>> > >>> > Is there a technical reason why we can't add a zmq.LEVEL_FD that would >>> > behave in a more conventional manner: >>> > >>> > - level-triggered >>> > - signal write when socket is writable >>> > - signal read when socket is readable >>> > >>> > I would work on this myself, but unfortunately I don't think I have the >>> > relevant expertise. >>> > >>> > -MinRK >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > zeromq-dev mailing list >>> > [email protected] >>> > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ >>> zeromq-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> zeromq-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > >
_______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
