mosquitto VS sobjectizer

mosquitto_transport, an experiment of writing SObjectizer-based wrapper around mosquitto library;

References: Felipe Flop’s website https://www.filipeflop.com/blog/controle-monitoramento-iot-nodemcu-e-mqtt/ accessed on 01/27/2018. Eclipse server for MQTT Broker https://iot.eclipse.org/ accessed on 01/27/2018. Mosquitto https://mosquitto.org/ accessed on 01/27/2018. Cloud MQTT https://www.cloudmqtt.com/ accessed on 01/27/2018. DuckDNS https://www.duckdns.org/ accessed on 01/27/2018. Proftpd http://www.proftpd.org/ accessed on 01/27/2018. Filezilla https://filezilla-project.org/ accessed on 01/27/2018. Fritzing https://fritzing.org/ accessed on 05/25/2022. Appendices:

This is a perfect use case for MQTT, e.g. this library for ESP boards. Create a broker on the network (e.g. a Raspberry Pi running Mosquitto, and have all the ESP boards subscribe to a topic. When you want to play a sound, publish a message to the topic, and all of the ESPs should see it very quickly. You don't need to synchronize clocks any more because it's simply based on the timing of publishing a message.

While working on a personal project Komponist, I was due to update Mosquitto MQTT Broker due to a CVE and found some interesting changes that will impact me in the future when it comes to configuring the Broker. This post provides a solution to make the Broker compatible with future versions using new and less visited concepts in Docker Compose v2, namely:

Optional: Mosquitto, an open-source message broker that implements the MQTT protocol; this tutorial uses the public test server

I think he means implementation of MQTT protocol, like https://mosquitto.org/

Could MQTT work for you? You'd need a broker like Mosquitto, and then any of a number of MQTT clients.

Message Delivery Tracing aims to debug an application built on top of SObjectizer. In essence, it logs the primary stages of the message delivery process, allowing visibility into whether there is a suitable subscriber with the corresponding event handler.

An additional rationale for structuring cooperations in hierarchies is to facilitate the sharing and propagation of dispatchers. A recent update of SObjectizer includes new functionalities that allow access to both agent and cooperation dispatchers. This enhancement was prompted by feedback provided by a user and myself.

If a stop signal arrives, it will be enqueued at the end as a demand for image_producer_callback. This means, it will be processed after the other 6 demands currently in the queue. Maybe this is not an issue but in some cases it might be. At this point, another feature of SObjectizer is to consider: agent priorities. Essentially, this feature allows for the demands to be handled in different orders based on the priorities of agents. In this context, if we assign image_producer_callback a higher priority than others, the “stop signal” would be processed before the rest of the requests.

The real solution consists in using another slick feature of SObjectizer: mutable messages.

However, this kind of filtering is inefficient and might result in a significant run-time cost. Indeed, every empty cv::Mat follows all the message handling workflow, only to be thrown out. Although we expect that empty images will be sporadic, a more idiomatic approach exists: delivery filters.

SObjectizer’s agent states are quite sophisticated and provide some utilities that might be useful for developing a working solution. First of all, image_viewer can be modeled as a two-state agent:

An alternative way is using SObjectizer’s timers.

Those who came looking for actor model examples should check out sobjectizer

In sobjectizer the ownership is held by "environment" , while in rotor each thread must held appropriate context, when actor environment is running.

May be actor frameworks like caf, sobjectizer or rotor is something, that you are looking for.