If you use UDP, but layer a scheme on top of it to ensure reliable delivery, by the time you're done, you will have something which will basically be a user-space implementation of TCP.
If what you wind up with doesn't look basically like TCP, it's because you did something wrong
(
Read more... )
Comments 15
that's why if you do this, you want it for control/configure information remotely so it is done sparingly.
other else you basically have a ping flood from help.
it's like everyone shouting in a room directions that everyone must follow and pass onto others.
Reply
The entertaining thing about the third place was that I mentioned this in the interview, and explained exactly why it was a problem and why it was not possible to solve the problem within the limits of the design. They said "Well, we've never had a problem. That's because we're smarter than those other guys."
Three weeks after I started working there, the middleware melted down their network.
Reply
check out htis article, it might change their minds:
http://www.embedded.com/products/softwaretools/206905497?_requestid=753038
Reply
"From now on, you will buy your network weather from me!"
Reply
oh. yes.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
And it always works great in testing, and even scales up promisingly, until you reach a certain point of network congestion at which it goes directly from "works fine" to "smoking ruin" without passing through "hey guys, it looks like the network's starting to get hot".
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Poor guy, he thought it was a really neat idea. He just called me to let me know he made it halfway through the 4 minutes before he faded. I can't remember his exact words, but it was something along the lines of "It was worse than I believed it was possible for it to be". Still, he's far braver than I am to have even seriously attempted it.
Reply
Leave a comment