I can't really comment exhaustively without using the other solution, but in my experience ZeroMQ is good at delivering results under working conditions (especially loopback networks as this seems to be) and bad at failure under poor conditions.
Besides, Channels is more for handling of event streams with synchronous code than this, which seems to be a bit more celery like?
Andrew
On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 11:39 PM, Виталик Абеткин <abvit89@gmail.com> wrote:
--Hi, Django folks,I wonder how Django channels would compare to using https://github.com/ipython/ipyparallel for delayed synchronous jobs. It uses zeromq for message passing.Can it possibly be the right solution? What do you think about the performance?
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to django-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .
To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-users .
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-users/72b88683- .59ec-4393-b573-ac91f6bf4221% 40googlegroups.com
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to django-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-users.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-users/CAFwN1uq8Z7V5L2y05ygMYiCEgQiK3CwP6nivJpvFbi0_ny%3D77w%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
No comments:
Post a Comment