5 ms·

I would argue that is not a pragmatic approach. The article makes a good point about the huge benefits of this approach for relatively small workloads. Transact

I would argue that is not a pragmatic approach. The article makes a good point about the huge benefits of this approach for relatively small workloads. Transactional guarantees are hugely useful! Being able to rollback something like a user create including a queued job to send out a welcome email is incredibly nice. IMHO HN conversations tend too much toward solving problems at google scale. We often forget here that there are tons of high-value business critical systems that generate mere 10s, hundreds, or a few thousand background jobs a day. Given the numbers quoted in the article, DB backed queue systems scale quite far. I've successfully used them to handle tens of thousands of events per day with no problem over a timespan of years. It's clear that this is a great approach for some situations, and that one size fits all doesn't make sense here.

lozenge 9y ago
> Transactional guarantees are hugely useful! Being able to rollback something like a user create including a queued job to send out a welcome email is incredibly nice. That would work in this case - the job is added to the postgres table in a transaction, which eventually rolls back. The ID of the job was put into a separate queue. When the queue consumer tries to get the job from the database by ID, it doesn't see it because the transaction never committed. It can discard that job ID from its queue.
- andrewvc 9y ago
  Yes but then you need to support a whole additional piece of infrastructure and you have to write and support more code. For a lot of use cases that's a waste of time and money. This is a case of YAGNI for the use cases I mentioned.
joncrocks 9y ago
As a counterpoint, I would say "is it pragmatic to solve complex database issues in the middle of the night?" or "Do you prioritise fire safety or fire fighting" Using the wrong tool for the job will sometimes be pragmatic. But sometimes it will burn you, burn you hard, and it'll always be in the middle of the night (note the article's graph starts at midnight :-)). As long as you accept that, all is good in the world! What often happens though is that people set out with a simple aim, and rather than spending a litle bit of time honesting looking at what's out there, they re-invent the wheel. Because "How hard can it be?"

lozenge 9y ago

> Transactional guarantees are hugely useful! Being able to rollback something like a user create including a queued job to send out a welcome email is incredibly nice. That would work in this case - the job is added to the postgres table in a transaction, which eventually rolls back. The ID of the job was put into a separate queue. When the queue consumer tries to get the job from the database by ID, it doesn't see it because the transaction never committed. It can discard that job ID from its queue.

andrewvc 9y ago
Yes but then you need to support a whole additional piece of infrastructure and you have to write and support more code. For a lot of use cases that's a waste of time and money. This is a case of YAGNI for the use cases I mentioned.

joncrocks 9y ago

As a counterpoint, I would say "is it pragmatic to solve complex database issues in the middle of the night?" or "Do you prioritise fire safety or fire fighting" Using the wrong tool for the job will sometimes be pragmatic. But sometimes it will burn you, burn you hard, and it'll always be in the middle of the night (note the article's graph starts at midnight :-)). As long as you accept that, all is good in the world! What often happens though is that people set out with a simple aim, and rather than spending a litle bit of time honesting looking at what's out there, they re-invent the wheel. Because "How hard can it be?"