[enduku]

Fair points on both. Thanks for aasking.

The 120 MiB/s encode ceiling is the cost of the mode competition. that's where the ratio comes from. At 800-1600 MiB/s off a digitizer, fc is the bottleneck no matter what transport sits behind it; for that regime zstd-3 or lz4 are the better fit, or fc further down the pipeline on aggregated/decimated data.

You're also right on int/short. fc's modes look for IEEE-754 bit patterns, so doubles that started life as rescaled ints lose the structure those modes exploit. A native int16/int32 path is on the list.

For the wiring itself: I have a sister single-header library, vibe (https://github.com/xtellect/vibe), built for this exact pattern: length-prefixed TCP/IPC framing on Linux, with a `telemetry_sink` example close to the edge-sensor --> cloud-ingest case. Producer compresses with fc, ships framed bytes through vibe, consumer decompresses. Doesn't solve the throughput ceiling, but handles the producer/consumer setup cleanly.

edit: i think the comments is flagged automatically because I used `vibe` (bad name I know) :)