分享程序员开发的那些事...
更新时间：2023-12-01 15:52:28
广告1)否，
没有暴露给用户的套接字链接管理界面来测试/重置状态ZeroMQ框架中从FSA到FSA的链接.
是的， XREQ/XREP 可以帮助您克服僵局，这可能&确实发生在REQ/REP可扩展的正式沟通模式中:
引用:
REQ/REP死锁>>> https://***.com/a/38163015/3666197
Fig.1: 为什么在[1] in_WaitToRecvSTATE_W2R 的所有情况下都使用朴素的 REQ/REP
是错误的+ [2] in_WaitToRecvSTATE_W2R
主要是REQ-FSA/REP-FSA有限状态自动机的不可挽回的相互僵局，并且永远不会到达内部的下一个" in_WaitToSendSTATE_W2S 状态.
XTRN_RISK_OF_FSA_DEADLOCKED ~ { NETWORK_LoS
: || NETWORK_LoM
: || SIG_KILL( App2 )
: || ...
: }
:
[App1] ![ZeroMQ] : [ZeroMQ] ![App2]
code-control! code-control : [code-control ! code-control
+===========!=======================+ : +=====================!===========+
| ! ZMQ | : | ZMQ ! |
| ! REQ-FSA | : | REP-FSA! |
| !+------+BUF> .connect()| v |.bind() +BUF>------+! |
| !|W2S |___|>tcp:>---------[*]-----(tcp:)--|___|W2R |! |
| .send()>-o--->|___| | | |___|-o---->.recv() |
| ___/ !| ^ | |___| | | |___| ^ | |! \___ |
| REQ !| | v |___| | | |___| | v |! REP |
| \___.recv()<----o-|___| | | |___|<---o-<.send()___/ |
| !| W2R|___| | | |___| W2S|! |
| !+------<BUF+ | | <BUF+------+! |
| ! | | ! |
| ! ZMQ | | ZMQ ! |
| ! REQ-FSA | | REP-FSA ! |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~ DEADLOCKED in W2R ~~~~~~~~ * ~~~~~~ DEADLOCKED in W2R ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| ! /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\| |/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/! |
| ! \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/| |\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\! |
+===========!=======================+ +=====================!===========+
Fig.2: 人们可以使用几个纯ZeroMQ内置插件来实现***步进传输层，并添加一些SIG层工具以完全控制所有可能的分布式系统状态.>
App1.PULL.recv( ZMQ.NOBLOCK ) 和 App1.PULL.poll( 0 ) 很明显
[App1] ![ZeroMQ]
code-control! code-control
+===========!=======================+
| ! |
| !+----------+ |
| .poll()| W2R ___|.bind() |
| ____.recv()<----o-|___|-(tcp:)--------O
| PULL !| |___| | :
| !| |___| | :
| !| |___| | :
| !+------<BUF+ | :
| ! | : ![App2]
| ! | : [ZeroMQ] ! code-control
| ! | : [code-control ! once gets started ...
| ! | : +=====================!===========+
| ! | : | ! |
| ! | : | +----------+! |
| ! | : | |___ |! |
| ! | : | |___| <--o-<.send()____ |
| ! | :<<-------<tcp:<|___| W2S|! PUSH |
| ! | : .connect() <BUF+------+! |
| ! | : | ! |
| ! | : | ! |
+===========!=======================+ : +=====================!===========+
广告2)否，
，但是可以创建自己的"ZeroMQ消耗品" ，以测试分布式系统设置新的传输/信令套接字的能力，准备好处置它，如果RTO测试未能证明双方都准备好通过ZeroMQ基础设施进行设置并进行通信(请注意，问题不仅出在ZeroMQ上，层，但应用程序端也不必处于就绪状态/处于这种状态以处理预期的通信交互(并可能导致软锁/死锁).
我现在对您的其他问题所能做的就是引导您看到有关此主题的更大图片>> > ，其中包含更多参数，简单的信号平面/消息传递平面插图和指向必读书籍的直接链接来自Pieter HINTJENS.
I'm trying to implement a ZeroMQ pattern on the TCP layer between a c# application and distributed python servers. I've gotten a version working with the request-reply REQ/REP pattern and it seems relatively stable when testing on localhost. However, in testing, I've debugged a few situations, where I accidently send multiple requests before receiving a reply which apparently is not acceptable.
In practice the network will likely have lots of dropped packets and I suspect that I'll be dropping lots of replies and/or unable to send requests.
1) Is there a way to reset the connection between REQ/REP request-reply sockets?
Would a REOUTER/DEALER pattern instead make more sense? As this is my first application with ZeroMQ, I was hoping to keep it simple.
2) Is there a good ZeroMQ mechanism for handling the connectivity events? I've been reading "the guide" and there are a few mentions of monitoring connections, but no examples. I found the ZMonitor, but can't get the events to trigger in c#.
Ad 1) No,
there is not any socket link-management interface exposed to user to test/reset the state of the FSA-to-FSA link in ZeroMQ framework.
Yes, XREQ/XREP may help you overcome the deadlocks, that may & do happen in REQ/REP Scaleable Formal Communication Pattern:
Ref.:
REQ/REPDeadlocks >>> https://***.com/a/38163015/3666197
Fig.1: Why it is wrong to use a naive REQ/REP
all cases when [1]in_WaitToRecvSTATE_W2R + [2]in_WaitToRecvSTATE_W2R
are principally unsalvageable mutual deadlock of REQ-FSA/REP-FSA Finite-State-Automata and will never reach the "next" in_WaitToSendSTATE_W2S internal state.
XTRN_RISK_OF_FSA_DEADLOCKED ~ { NETWORK_LoS
: || NETWORK_LoM
: || SIG_KILL( App2 )
: || ...
: }
:
[App1] ![ZeroMQ] : [ZeroMQ] ![App2]
code-control! code-control : [code-control ! code-control
+===========!=======================+ : +=====================!===========+
| ! ZMQ | : | ZMQ ! |
| ! REQ-FSA | : | REP-FSA! |
| !+------+BUF> .connect()| v |.bind() +BUF>------+! |
| !|W2S |___|>tcp:>---------[*]-----(tcp:)--|___|W2R |! |
| .send()>-o--->|___| | | |___|-o---->.recv() |
| ___/ !| ^ | |___| | | |___| ^ | |! \___ |
| REQ !| | v |___| | | |___| | v |! REP |
| \___.recv()<----o-|___| | | |___|<---o-<.send()___/ |
| !| W2R|___| | | |___| W2S|! |
| !+------<BUF+ | | <BUF+------+! |
| ! | | ! |
| ! ZMQ | | ZMQ ! |
| ! REQ-FSA | | REP-FSA ! |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~ DEADLOCKED in W2R ~~~~~~~~ * ~~~~~~ DEADLOCKED in W2R ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| ! /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\| |/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/! |
| ! \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/| |\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\! |
+===========!=======================+ +=====================!===========+
Fig.2: One may implement a free-stepping transmission layer using several pure ZeroMQ builtins and add some SIG-layer tools for getting a full control of all possible distributed system states.
App1.PULL.recv( ZMQ.NOBLOCK ) and App1.PULL.poll( 0 ) are obvious
[App1] ![ZeroMQ]
code-control! code-control
+===========!=======================+
| ! |
| !+----------+ |
| .poll()| W2R ___|.bind() |
| ____.recv()<----o-|___|-(tcp:)--------O
| PULL !| |___| | :
| !| |___| | :
| !| |___| | :
| !+------<BUF+ | :
| ! | : ![App2]
| ! | : [ZeroMQ] ! code-control
| ! | : [code-control ! once gets started ...
| ! | : +=====================!===========+
| ! | : | ! |
| ! | : | +----------+! |
| ! | : | |___ |! |
| ! | : | |___| <--o-<.send()____ |
| ! | :<<-------<tcp:<|___| W2S|! PUSH |
| ! | : .connect() <BUF+------+! |
| ! | : | ! |
| ! | : | ! |
+===========!=======================+ : +=====================!===========+
Ad 2) No,
but one may create one's own "ZeroMQ-consumables" to test the distributed system's ability to setup a new transport/signalling socket, being ready to dispose it, if the RTO-test fails to prove that both ( multiple ) sides are ready to setup + communicate over the ZeroMQ infrastructure ( notice, that the problems are not only with the ZeroMQ layer, but also the App-side need not be ready/in such a state to handle the expected communication interactions ( and may cause soft-locks / dead-locks ).
What I can do for your further questions right now is to direct you to see a bigger picture on this subject >>> with more arguments, a simple signalling-plane / messaging-plane illustration and a direct link to a must-read book from Pieter HINTJENS.