3 ms·
It's a good point, and actually some of our users already have this local queue implementation anyway because they want to send webhooks asynchronously. So it's
by tasn 6y ago
It's a good point, and actually some of our users already have this local queue implementation anyway because they want to send webhooks asynchronously. So it's definitely something to keep in mind. We already make it easy to query the service for what webhooks were delivered, but we also let you use the API with idempotency keys to ensure messages are not accepted twice.
I agree about all the issues you outlined though. One thing we plan on doing in terms of internet being down and cloud provider not having routes: have a lot of endpoints spread geographically in every region, and maybe in the same/nearby data centers.
Thanks again for the feedback!
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- mrkurt 6y agoFor what it's worth, Stripe's Idempotent Requests are a nice way to handle this: https://stripe.com/docs/api/idempotent_requests https://stripe.com/docs/api/idempotent_requests We just send the same requests over and over until they're successful. It's relatively simple to use.
- tasn 6y agoYeah, we also support idempotency (the event ID is used for that). I'll add it to that comment, I forgot to mention it. :P Edit: ahh, I already mentioned it, it's buried in my comment.