3 ms·
> Throughout that time we have scaled to 200+ concurrent consumers running across a dozen virtual machines while coordinating message processing (1 queue to N c
by abraxas 4y ago
> Throughout that time we have scaled to 200+ concurrent consumers running across a dozen virtual machines while coordinating message processing (1 queue to N consumers) and processed hundreds of millions of messages in our .NET application.
That's not a level of data volume that should require any kind of distributed messaging.
- iasay 4y agoI don't think there's enough information to make that assertion there.
- abraxas 4y agoLet's be aggressive and interpret this into a worst case and assume that the author is referring to one week and 700 million messages. That's 100M messages per day or 1157 messages per second. That volume could be handled by a single DB table in an ACID way eliminating the need for a separate cluster
- iasay 4y agoDatabases aren’t queues. I’ve been burned by that a million times over the years. Also you screw your OLTP capacity there.
- abraxas 4y agoAt these volumes they can very well be. And when that is no longer tenable the time comes to introduce a streaming message system like Kafka. In my experience the use case for something like Rabbit is a small crevice between these two solutions that I have little use for
- iasay 4y agoI wouldn’t use RabbitMQ. I’d use SQS.