设计模式寻求建议:pushmodelv.pull模型。-designpatternaskingforadvice:pushmodelv.s.pullmodel

3  

The advantage of the "pull" model is that each worker knows locally how much it is loaded and thus can manage its load.

“拉动”模型的优点是，每个worker都知道本地加载了多少负载，因此可以管理其负载。

Also, the "pull" model might be more "decoupled" as the variable of "load" is kept local to the worker whereas in the "push" model one would need a communication protocol (and overhead) to communicate this state.

此外，“拉”模型可能更“解耦”，因为“负载”的变量对工作者是本地的，而在“推”模型中，一个人需要一个通信协议(和开销)来通信这个状态。

Think of the success of the "pull" model in the auto industry: it went from the traditional "push" model where inventories would be difficult to track and required lots of feedback to the now successful and ubiquitous "pull" model.

想想汽车行业“拉动”模式的成功:它来自传统的“推”模式，在这种模式下，存货很难追踪，需要大量反馈给现在成功且无处不在的“拉”模型。

When it comes to scaling, you can have an intermediate layer of "schedulers" that "poll" for jobs from the layer above. The base workers can now interact with the intermediate layer in a partitioned way.

当谈到扩展时，您可以有一个中间的“调度器”层，从上面的层“轮询”作业。基工作者现在可以以分区的方式与中间层交互。

Note that in either model a coordination communication protocol is required: it is the nature of the coordination protocol that differs. In the "push model", there is an additional control loop required to report/poll the "load factor" of each worker. As one scale the system, more bandwidth is required, more state on the scheduler side, more latency incurred etc.

注意，在任何一个模型中都需要一个协调通信协议:它是不同的协调协议的性质。在“push模型”中，需要一个额外的控制循环来报告/轮询每个worker的“负载因数”。当扩展系统时，需要更多的带宽、调度器端更多的状态、产生更多的延迟等等。

2  

I would certainly use the Pull model as it is simpler to implement.

我肯定会使用拉模型，因为它更容易实现。

I can only imagine 2 implementations:

我只能想象两种实现:

1. Pull model = 1 service with the tasks collection plus many worker clients.

   拉动模型= 1个服务，包含任务集合和许多工作客户端。

2. Push model = 1 service with the tasks collection and a list of active subscribers plus many active subscribers (workers).

   Push model = 1服务，包含任务集合和活动订阅者列表以及许多活动订阅者(工作者)。

As the Pull model doesn't have to implement full duplex service calls neither a subscriber list, it is simpler.

由于拉模型不需要实现全双工服务调用，也不需要订阅者列表，因此更简单。