[erlang-questions] 0MQ libraries
Thu Jan 30 23:18:41 CET 2014
On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 11:15 PM, Michael Truog <> wrote:
> On 01/30/2014 01:58 PM, Garrett Smith wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Joe Armstrong <> wrote:
>>> Is anybody working on upgrading the 0MQ libraries for erlang to
>>> the latest version of 0QM.
>> I would be tempted to upgrade them, but I've wanted to have an
>> external C port implementation of the 0MQ bindings for a while and so
>> created this:
>> In my three years of experience with the 0MQ bindings, it's been
>> (historically) very easy to crash the Erlang VM. For my applications,
>> speed will never justify the cost of taking an entire node down. The
>> CZMQ bindings I have here are quite slow relative to erlzmq2 (~ 5 - 10
>> times slower). I'm sure they can be made much faster, but my thinking
>> is that running multiple external ports could alleviate this.
>> Speed kills.
>> This code is not running in production, but it will be soon.
>> The CZMQ API in my opinion is the right target for new 0MQ bindings,
>> regardless of how they're implemented. Pieter Hintjen's rationale for
>> writing CZMQ is here:
>> erlang-questions mailing list
> Yes, but https://github.com/gar1t/erlang-czmq has a GPLv3 license, while
> https://github.com/zeromq/erlzmq2 has a BSD license, so that can also
> affect the choice. erlang-czmq appears impossible to use in any commercial
> way, including in a service (due to it being v3 of the GPL). So, that is a
> concern, aside from it being slow. Though, I am not a lawyer, I am not
> giving legal advice.
indeed. It should probably better to use LGPL3 if you want to make sure to
get the changes on your lib or MPL2 if you want to keep a little the spirit
of the gpl. So it doesn't have any possible side-effect on the code using
> erlang-questions mailing list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the erlang-questions