Re: [mongrel2] stomp
- From:
- janko metelko
- Date:
- 2010-06-28 @ 12:22
Zed. Thanks for clear opinion :)
I am following mongrel2. I think your idea of merging resp/req and realtime
is general mq is the right step in future.
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 1:35 AM, Zed A. Shaw <zedshaw@zedshaw.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 12:52:25AM +0200, janko metelko wrote:
> > not rooting for it just interested in your thoughts of stomp vs 0mq
>
> Stomp sucks. It's nothing compared to 0mq for the simple reason that
> Stomp took all the classic mistakes that HTTP made and brought them to
> the world of high speed message queueing. They just cargo culted the
> protocol design and used marketing rather than technical merits to gain
> adoption.
>
> --
> Zed A. Shaw
> http://zedshaw.com/
>
Re: [mongrel2] stomp
- From:
- Timothy Rodriguez
- Date:
- 2010-06-28 @ 12:18
Now I'm curious on your thoughts of the mistakes in the http protocol?
Maybe that could be a blog post? I'd definitely be interested in
your perspective on that.
-Tim
On Jun 27, 2010, at 7:35 PM, "Zed A. Shaw" <zedshaw@zedshaw.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 12:52:25AM +0200, janko metelko wrote:
>> not rooting for it just interested in your thoughts of stomp vs 0mq
>
> Stomp sucks. It's nothing compared to 0mq for the simple reason that
> Stomp took all the classic mistakes that HTTP made and brought them to
> the world of high speed message queueing. They just cargo culted the
> protocol design and used marketing rather than technical merits to gain
> adoption.
>
> --
> Zed A. Shaw
> http://zedshaw.com/