3 ms·
Does this mean that RabbitMQ must be renamed for the "psychological safety" of students like Coq?
by vbclxxx 5y ago
Does this mean that RabbitMQ must be renamed for the "psychological safety" of students like Coq?
- dan-robertson 5y agoI think this is an incorrect description of the reason for renaming Coq.
- samhw 5y agoHaha, this reminds me of a previous company I worked at, whose backend was at one point so architected as to enqueue every single HTTP request onto RabbitMQ to be processed, and then consume the response and return it to the client. (Don't ask me why - for whatever reason, they wanted an entirely async system.) Anyway, RabbitMQ was so unreliable that they ended up having a 'Rabbit Watcher' service, devoted to monitoring Rabbit and alerting them when it went down. And when that service proved unreliable, they added a Rabbit Watcher Watcher. Presumably it was when that service failed that they finally decided to ditch RabbitMQ...
- LandR 5y agoWe have a service that is just terrible that runs here and crashes a lot. Somtimes multiple times a day. And instead of rewriting it they have a program that watches it too. And restarts it if it fails... I can't believe the same nonsense exists elsewhere. ours is nothing to do with rabbitmq
- samhw 5y agoHaha, at a multi-billion-dollar company too, in my case. The truth is that companies don't tend towards the best code possible, they tend towards the worst code allowable to serve their purposes.