DEdevxpy·Aug 20, 2018
> I would suggest you don't make dramatic claims
If you could point out some stuff from ZProc's page, that would be nice!
> mpi is the grandfather of message passing libraries
Never heard of it before, but just a simple google search reveals that it _might_ be more performant than zmq, but not as fault-tolerant and flexible. It really looks like a niche thing, from this comment by peter hintjens
> Why smart cloud builders are betting everything on 0MQ. In detail, compare to the alternatives. Hand-rolling your own TCP stack is insane. Using any broker-based product won't scale. Buying licenses from IBM or TIBCO would eat up your capital. Supercomputing products like MPI aren't designed for this scale. There is literally no alternative.
(http://zeromq.org/docs:the-ten-minute-talk)
> Don't get me wrong, message-passing has some advantages, b
Read the rest
ut they certainly aren't that it 'solves' parallelism.
Doesn't it? (For most people)
---
I can't believe I'm hearing words against zmq on HN, its wierd.
Even the guys over at Dask settled on ZMQ over anything - https://github.com/dask/distributed/issues/776
P.S. Seems like you know quite a lot about this topic. Do you have any projects of your own that I can see?
Bottom line, I think most people would be happy doing message passing parallelism in the real world. Sure, it doesn't look that good in theory but works damn good in practicality.