(the Rabbit bit is interesting, I kind of came to the conclusion queues could be done in Crossbar which makes for a single messaging library, I'd be interested to hearabout the use-case if it's something you could share?)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Crossbar" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/crossbario/m0yE-wNAbYU/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to crossbario+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to cross...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/crossbario/f7200fb0-500c-4e83-a4b4-76708c9830a5%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Ok, well firstly thanks for taking the time to detail your setup, sounds like you have something fairly substantial there. Secondly I'm going to add a caveat with regards
to the next bit; the specifics of licensing have yet to be set in stone, so what I'm about to say contains a degree of personal opinion and 'ideas so far'.If you look back in these groups, you'll see I've been a user for many users and started asking questions about scalability maybe three years ago (!) so for me, it's
right there at the top of my 'must have' list. Given my background (as an OS user) , having this as an Enterprise only feature makes no sense at all because in orderfor people to see that the product 'does' scale, you need to be able to see it in action. To this end I'm expecting there to be a 'free tier' which includes HA features.i.e. the product hasn't suddenly gone 'all commercial' :)(which I must admit, some of the documentation might imply)
Whereas the UI is designed to be an Enterprise feature, the same sort of thing applies, if nobody can see it, getting people to pay for it is going to be difficult, so again
there will need to be some sort of free tier in order to promote adoption. If you want to give FX a try with the current public instance of the UI, let me know and I'll see
if I can sort you out with copies of stuff. (CrossbarFX is currently available as a public download)
The other thing that I had initially envisaged was "Enterprise version == prohibitively expensive" and historically I had ignored all postings relating to the Enterprise
version for just that reason. However, my understanding is that we're talking (in terms of scale) "Google Docs pricing" rather than "Enterprise Exchange Server pricing",i.e. on a small scale it's probably free, but if you're working on a larger scale, you pay a very modest fee for a commercially supported product. So if I were to go back
to the OS community, I'm relatively convinced that I would continue to develop HA applications on the free tier, on the basis that I would probably be happy to pay for
(and be able to pay for) the enterprise stuff should I scale that far.Just going back to your diagram, I'd not seen a use for nor used realms prior to May this year .. however ( :) ) .. after discovering what they do and how easy they are
to use (specifically with the UI) I now use them (literally) for everything. In the context of your configuration for example, typically I would make 1 realm == 1 environment,which means you get 5 routers / processes instead of 1, which immediately gives 5x the routing capacity vs using a single realm (?!) (not to mention 'hard' partitioning
between environments)
(the Rabbit bit is interesting, I kind of came to the conclusion queues could be done in Crossbar which makes for a single messaging library, I'd be interested to hearabout the use-case if it's something you could share?)
With regards to gRPC, I've been using this over the last month as an alternative interface to HTTP when talking to a service that supports both .. and in terms of performance
it's much better than http, maybe between 3 and 6 times faster in real terms. However .. (again in terms of performance) it doesn't seem to compare fare all that well againstWAMP / Crossbar .. if you get round to doing any benchmarking and come up with a comparison, again I'd be interested in seeing any results?(also, I found gRPC relatively painful to develop, maybe I'm too used to Autobahn .. ;) )
With regards to a commercial path .. on the one hand there is no future in developing a product like this just for a few corporate users, but on the other hand it's not possible
to develop the product with zero income .. ideally someone would pay us lots of money to develop a completely free Enterprise version .. that may still happen .. ;)
> Agreed, Im always curious how so many companies give their product away and still make moneyWell I guess it's different for every company, but I think in general, support contracts with large customers and custom coding projects probably figure. I think thereare larger companies, without core developers, or with staff retention issues, who use free software. So having someone on the end of a phone who can fixanything for a price, is an attractive safety net for the well heeled .. :)I'll see if I can find out if there's anything available yet re; pricing plans ...
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Crossbar" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/crossbario/m0yE-wNAbYU/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to crossbario+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to cross...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/crossbario/0e4d482a-4e65-4bbd-8a9d-a1d11ddcab83%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/crossbario/80de67e9-e8d2-4ab6-9220-e379acd3b02e%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
> <mailto:crossbario+unsub...@googlegroups.com>.
> To post to this group, send email to cross...@googlegroups.com
> <mailto:cross...@googlegroups.com>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/crossbario/80de67e9-e8d2-4ab6-9220-e379acd3b02e%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/crossbario/80de67e9-e8d2-4ab6-9220-e379acd3b02e%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
>
> --
> Zaar
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Crossbar" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to crossbario+...@googlegroups.com
> <mailto:crossbario+unsub...@googlegroups.com>.
So, whereas FX will do a lot of things you don't need, there are some important features going in there that you might find useful. In addition to the scaling and thedelivery format (deploying Crossbar as a pre-compiled [python] binary is very convenient) FX has the ability to access and control "docker" on the machineon which it's deployed .. so if you build your client applications / microservices as docker images, it can pull, deploy, start, stop, update and monitor your clientapplications from within the UI, and changing the crossbar configuration no longer means having to edit config.json .. :) ..
At first glance Docker might not appear of any use of you're not a docker user, but it's effectively providing package management and partitioning for your microservices with very little fuss.(I wasn't really a Docker fan, however in this context it's sort of growing on me ...)Anyway, hope this helps a little ...
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Crossbar" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/crossbario/m0yE-wNAbYU/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to crossbario+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to cross...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/crossbario/a819a677-3995-425d-bd95-b0f94468847e%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Crossbar" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/crossbario/m0yE-wNAbYU/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to crossbario+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to cross...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/crossbario/58e4b990-9901-4e67-b45c-4295329a273c%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/crossbario/ff266143-070f-424a-890d-1e53a99b65b6%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Hi Zaar,Mmm, "smart clients dumb pipes" plays very well in a DevOps / pipeline context (as does the single realm model) as you consciouslywant 100% separation between environments. That said, there is a question of "how dumb"?From a Crossbar perspective, I think it's a "smart pipe", but you can enable the various degrees of smartness .. (or not). So it will behavelike a "dumb pipe" if you want it to, however for users who want it to do more .. it will .. :)From my perspective I like the idea of fail-overs being totally transparent to the client, which removes some edge case handlingor 'what do I have to think about if I have to connect to a different crossbar'.
This can (in theory) be done if the client holds > 1 crossbarconnection open. If you're set up to handle disconnections as 'restarts', that should work fine either way so long as it's an acceptableoutage from the application's perspective.
Personally I understand the point you make with regards to simple scaling, and I don't disagree.From your point of view, would you see "simple" as a two node solution, or an (n) node solution?
Just as an aside on the client restart issue, if the client is able to get a full-state-snapshot quickly on a reconnect, as a solution thiswould seem to be workable with regards to relatively low numbers clients surviving restarts. If on the other hand current-state is'substantial', the ability to reconnect while just obtaining incremental / missed events, might be appealing from a performanceperspective. If a state refresh is a few MB's, and you have 10,000 clients switching from CrossbarA to CrossbarB, and each clientjust has to request a message or two for the fraction of a second it's disconnected, this is relatively trivial. If on the other hand theserver has to perform a state generation routine 10,000 times and transmit a few MB's 10,000 times, it becomes a less trivial operation ..(different use-cases, different perspectives .. :) )
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/crossbario/92301872-2c5e-4821-9e09-8b1c837482e0%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/crossbario/19285918-054e-459e-8c47-f8485b4c1234%40googlegroups.com.
Hi Greg,Personally, in general I think we're on the same page .. :) .. but a couple of questions if I may?- assuming the HA you describe, the sidecar option I guess would be implicit, however any sort of sidecarimplementation would be a performance hit to an extent as it would rely on an additional "hop" in terms ofmessage forwarding .. do I take it from this that performance is not a critical factor for you?
- when you say 'without losing any connections', do you have an idea of how this could work? I'm just thinking ofall the associated structures and dependencies associated with a connection that might change if the underlyingsoftware was updated and the time it takes to re-establish a lot of them .. a more transparent mechanism forrolling updates for example might be a staggered migration to other routers prior to a shutdown?(i.e. what's the target in terms of not losing connections, transparency, lack of outage .. ?)
- how quickly would the HA solution need to become available to keep you interested in Crossbar?
- would you be interested in being a tester?
Also, in terms of the stuff you would be interested in paying for ( I gotta ask :) ) , I'm familiar with a number of thetools you mention .. and we already have a bunch of interesting toys for network-wide event and message monitoring,but what sort of feature-set would be interesting to you from this perspective?