4 ms·

Nats is not something I see as a competitor for external clients (browsers, mobile apps), primarily because it doesn't handle reconnections / message delivery /

Nats is not something I see as a competitor for external clients (browsers, mobile apps), primarily because it doesn't handle reconnections / message delivery / quality-of-service / at-least-once or exactly-once delivery (except for MQTT). > When the connection is lost, your application would have to re-create it and all subscriptions if any. https://github.com/nats-io/stan.go#connection-status https://github.com/nats-io/stan.go#connection-status Therefore, I don't see what it adds here. It seems designed for service communication, not client-server. They also don't list browsers as a use case https://docs.nats.io/nats-concepts/overview#use-cases https://docs.nats.io/nats-concepts/overview#use-cases. (though it is of course possible, it's just not ideal IMHO.) They still have a js/browser client library though if you want to use them: https://github.com/nats-io/nats.ws https://github.com/nats-io/nats.ws. And yes, their servers "have websocket support".

SpaghettiX 4y ago
They also don't list themselves as competitors to products that do target this market: ably, firebase messaging, pubnub, pusher. Instead, they compare themselves to Kafka, RabbitMQ, Pulsar, and gRPC, none of which work well on browsers. (Yes grpc-web "works" on the browser, but I suggest everyone avoids it.) https://docs.nats.io/nats-concepts/overview/compare-nats https://docs.nats.io/nats-concepts/overview/compare-nats
bruth 4y ago
In fact it does all of these things now properly! STAN (NATS Streaming) was deprecated two years ago in favor of a new embedded subsystem called JetStream: https://docs.nats.io/nats-concepts/jetstream https://docs.nats.io/nats-concepts/jetstream released in March 2021.
- SpaghettiX 4y ago
  Even with NATS jetstream, NATS has a focus on service communication. "It supports websockets" and "qos" does not mean it will work robustly with web apps if nobody uses NATS for that use case. See https://github.com/nats-io/nats.ws/issues/172 https://github.com/nats-io/nats.ws/issues/172 for an example issue. If NATS is not used for websockets in browsers, it will have a mine field of issues to fix. And what about all the other clients (mobile, mobile web)? Sure there may be a NATS client library for it, but it won't handle user connectivity issues, because again it's aimed at service communication where the network is great. People are using NATS in kubernetes, not web browsers.
  - bruth 4y ago
    > Even with NATS jetstream, NATS has a focus on service communication. It indeed excels at service communication as well. However, a core use case for NATS is the edge, be it your definition (browsers and mobile), but also in cars, factories, tractors, low-orbit satellites, etc, whether it is running on Kubernetes, k3s, or bare metal. The issue you called out is a Firefox-specific issue, but it will be addressed and not indicative of an inherit limitation of NATS. Check out this playlist of a live event I organized last fall with a variety of live demos: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLgqCaaYodvKY6xRbvB6ffON0_ahyhDsoM https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLgqCaaYodvKY6xRbvB6ffON0_...
    - SpaghettiX 4y ago
      Currently, the only people I see talking about NATS for edge is Synadia - they're also not very specific. In theory/documentation, "edge" is a core NATS use case, but in practice why does NATS compare themselves to Kafka and microservices? Most of that playlist is not edge-focused. Can you explain what concepts and problems you have to solve to support the "edge" - none of that is in your website. > The issue you called out is a Firefox-specific issue, but it will be addressed and not indicative of an inherit limitation of NATS. My point is NATS is not being used in browsers, mobile apps or edge use cases. It doesn't even explore the concepts. It looks like it doesn't care about Firefox. For IoT, what does NATS bring on top of MQTT? NATS ends up being an MQTT broker so it will have to compete with all of them. Why don't you start comparing yourself to products and technology that serve the edge (other edge-focused companies (ably, pusher, pubnub), and other MQTT brokers)? Side note: Would appreciate it if you disclosed your affiliation with Synadia and NATS before advertising it.
      - bruth 4y ago
        > Would appreciate it if you disclosed your affiliation with Synadia and NATS before advertising it. Fair point, but I did not mention Synadia. FWIW, I have been a NATS user for seven+ years prior to joining Synadia so I was speaking on behalf of myself and experience with the tech. Also fair point that the nats.io website does not highlight this strongly. The NATS maintainers are aware (nearly all employed by Synadia) and we are working on it. I disagree that simply because it is not advertised as a "edge" technology that it is not one of the best-in-class techs for edge. It simply means, we are doing a poor job at awareness. > Why don't you start comparing yourself to products and technology that serve the edge The vast majority of people and customers compare NATS to Kafka and the variety of variants out there. Once the push on edge occurs, I suspect comparison to these other tech will occur. To be clear, I am not looking for a "winner" in this discussion, rather my original comment was to correct a gap in understanding of what NATS is capable of.

SpaghettiX 4y ago

They also don't list themselves as competitors to products that do target this market: ably, firebase messaging, pubnub, pusher. Instead, they compare themselves to Kafka, RabbitMQ, Pulsar, and gRPC, none of which work well on browsers. (Yes grpc-web "works" on the browser, but I suggest everyone avoids it.) https://docs.nats.io/nats-concepts/overview/compare-nats https://docs.nats.io/nats-concepts/overview/compare-nats

bruth 4y ago

In fact it does all of these things now properly! STAN (NATS Streaming) was deprecated two years ago in favor of a new embedded subsystem called JetStream: https://docs.nats.io/nats-concepts/jetstream https://docs.nats.io/nats-concepts/jetstream released in March 2021.

SpaghettiX 4y ago
Even with NATS jetstream, NATS has a focus on service communication. "It supports websockets" and "qos" does not mean it will work robustly with web apps if nobody uses NATS for that use case. See https://github.com/nats-io/nats.ws/issues/172 https://github.com/nats-io/nats.ws/issues/172 for an example issue. If NATS is not used for websockets in browsers, it will have a mine field of issues to fix. And what about all the other clients (mobile, mobile web)? Sure there may be a NATS client library for it, but it won't handle user connectivity issues, because again it's aimed at service communication where the network is great. People are using NATS in kubernetes, not web browsers.
- bruth 4y ago
  > Even with NATS jetstream, NATS has a focus on service communication. It indeed excels at service communication as well. However, a core use case for NATS is the edge, be it your definition (browsers and mobile), but also in cars, factories, tractors, low-orbit satellites, etc, whether it is running on Kubernetes, k3s, or bare metal. The issue you called out is a Firefox-specific issue, but it will be addressed and not indicative of an inherit limitation of NATS. Check out this playlist of a live event I organized last fall with a variety of live demos: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLgqCaaYodvKY6xRbvB6ffON0_ahyhDsoM https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLgqCaaYodvKY6xRbvB6ffON0_...
  - SpaghettiX 4y ago
    Currently, the only people I see talking about NATS for edge is Synadia - they're also not very specific. In theory/documentation, "edge" is a core NATS use case, but in practice why does NATS compare themselves to Kafka and microservices? Most of that playlist is not edge-focused. Can you explain what concepts and problems you have to solve to support the "edge" - none of that is in your website. > The issue you called out is a Firefox-specific issue, but it will be addressed and not indicative of an inherit limitation of NATS. My point is NATS is not being used in browsers, mobile apps or edge use cases. It doesn't even explore the concepts. It looks like it doesn't care about Firefox. For IoT, what does NATS bring on top of MQTT? NATS ends up being an MQTT broker so it will have to compete with all of them. Why don't you start comparing yourself to products and technology that serve the edge (other edge-focused companies (ably, pusher, pubnub), and other MQTT brokers)? Side note: Would appreciate it if you disclosed your affiliation with Synadia and NATS before advertising it.
    - bruth 4y ago
      > Would appreciate it if you disclosed your affiliation with Synadia and NATS before advertising it. Fair point, but I did not mention Synadia. FWIW, I have been a NATS user for seven+ years prior to joining Synadia so I was speaking on behalf of myself and experience with the tech. Also fair point that the nats.io website does not highlight this strongly. The NATS maintainers are aware (nearly all employed by Synadia) and we are working on it. I disagree that simply because it is not advertised as a "edge" technology that it is not one of the best-in-class techs for edge. It simply means, we are doing a poor job at awareness. > Why don't you start comparing yourself to products and technology that serve the edge The vast majority of people and customers compare NATS to Kafka and the variety of variants out there. Once the push on edge occurs, I suspect comparison to these other tech will occur. To be clear, I am not looking for a "winner" in this discussion, rather my original comment was to correct a gap in understanding of what NATS is capable of.