Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Is Service Weaver suitable for writing tcp server? #785

Closed
wind-c opened this issue Jul 22, 2024 · 4 comments
Closed

Is Service Weaver suitable for writing tcp server? #785

wind-c opened this issue Jul 22, 2024 · 4 comments

Comments

@wind-c
Copy link

wind-c commented Jul 22, 2024

I've only seen examples of http.

@rgrandl
Copy link
Collaborator

rgrandl commented Jul 23, 2024

@wind-c it should. E.g., you can run a gRPC server to export the listener instead of a HTTP server. We're working on adding an example to our website.

@wind-c
Copy link
Author

wind-c commented Jul 24, 2024

@mwhittaker @rgrandl
I wrote the tcp server example and the single-process mode is fine. The new question is, in the multi-process, multi-machine, or multi-replica deployment, how do you find out which replica a given client tcp connection is on? How do you route messages to this tcp connection?

Http is used for request-response services, but for push, notification, chat, pub-sub and other types of services are based on tcp connections, and messages must be routed to the specified client tcp connection.

@wind-c
Copy link
Author

wind-c commented Aug 1, 2024

The response to the Issue was too slow, and the long wait was too painful.

@rgrandl
Copy link
Collaborator

rgrandl commented Aug 7, 2024

I already answered to this question in the other PR. Can you elaborate on what exactly you're trying to do?

Slowness - we've been a little bit overwhelmed with other things, sorry about that. Open source is just one way we contribute to the project.

@wind-c wind-c closed this as completed Aug 8, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants