3 ms·

Looking good. Question is how is it going to convince people to move over from Kafka.

by ninjamayo 9y ago

buro9 9y ago
> Question is how is it going to convince people to move over from Kafka That's a bit unfair given that the project didn't mention Kafka in it's README and different products have different suitability at different scale and this could simply be a "if your traffic is low and you need this functionality, this will suffice" thing or just an academic interest in producing an ordered distributed message queue. But as you're asking: Proven ability to consume ~5+ million messages per second with a similar or less hardware requirement than Kafka and high reliability. Well document set of edge cases / compromises where applicable and a high degree of observability. Well understood operational requirements, and SRE runbooks (or just a lot of Github issues that go into how to handle various scenario). An active community of people to assist, and more than 1 committer. That's the "off the top of my head" thing. YMMV.
- moreless 9y ago
  I have no opinion about each of these projects, but his caught my eye: > Well document set of edge cases / compromises where applicable and a high degree of observability. Well understood operational requirements, and SRE runbooks (or just a lot of Github issues that go into how to handle various scenario). An active community of people to assist, and more than 1 committer. Are you talking about Sandglass or Kafka? Because Sandglass seems 3 months old, has 1 contributor and is featured here as "Show HN"... So it probably isn't as mature solution as Kafka is. Or am I missing something?
sz4kerto 9y ago
Kafka is not a task queue. Well, it is, but it's also an extremely scalable distributed schemaless persistent data store; probably that trait differentiates it from other fast commit logs.
qaq 9y ago
by not having to run Zookeeper :)?

3 ms·

Looking good. Question is how is it going to convince people to move over from Kafka.

by ninjamayo 9y ago

Looking good. Question is how is it going to convince people to move over from Kafka.

buro9 9y ago
> Question is how is it going to convince people to move over from Kafka That's a bit unfair given that the project didn't mention Kafka in it's README and different products have different suitability at different scale and this could simply be a "if your traffic is low and you need this functionality, this will suffice" thing or just an academic interest in producing an ordered distributed message queue. But as you're asking: Proven ability to consume ~5+ million messages per second with a similar or less hardware requirement than Kafka and high reliability. Well document set of edge cases / compromises where applicable and a high degree of observability. Well understood operational requirements, and SRE runbooks (or just a lot of Github issues that go into how to handle various scenario). An active community of people to assist, and more than 1 committer. That's the "off the top of my head" thing. YMMV.
- moreless 9y ago
  I have no opinion about each of these projects, but his caught my eye: > Well document set of edge cases / compromises where applicable and a high degree of observability. Well understood operational requirements, and SRE runbooks (or just a lot of Github issues that go into how to handle various scenario). An active community of people to assist, and more than 1 committer. Are you talking about Sandglass or Kafka? Because Sandglass seems 3 months old, has 1 contributor and is featured here as "Show HN"... So it probably isn't as mature solution as Kafka is. Or am I missing something?
sz4kerto 9y ago
Kafka is not a task queue. Well, it is, but it's also an extremely scalable distributed schemaless persistent data store; probably that trait differentiates it from other fast commit logs.
qaq 9y ago
by not having to run Zookeeper :)?