3 ms·

Very cool. Where were you six months ago? ;) I was familiar with doozer, but doozer wasn't(/isn't) being actively maintained and it doesn't compile against the

Very cool. Where were you six months ago? ;) I was familiar with doozer, but doozer wasn't(/isn't) being actively maintained and it doesn't compile against the latest version of Go, so I'd have to bring it up to speed before I could use it anyways. Not saying it would be harder, but between that and writing the 0mq library (pretty sure one does not exist in Go yet), I'd estimate the work would be more or less equivalent and yield just about the same stability. Seat of the pants guess, but it makes me feel better, at least.

JulianMorrison 14y ago
Heh, thanks. The mailing list suggests http://github.com/4ad/doozer http://github.com/4ad/doozer and http://github.com/4ad/doozerd http://github.com/4ad/doozerd are being maintained as forks of the original. Or there's Zookeeper. Or brew your own central lookup server using 0mq that does the same job of "set a key, get a key, notify subscribers when it changes". It's a single point of failure, but since the system will run fine without it (only lacking topology updates) it's not a hugely problematic one.
- alexchamberlain 14y ago
  Isn't the lookup server a SPoF?
- paddyforan 14y ago
  This reply link just appeared for me. Not cool -_- The lookup server is a single point of failure. And while it's not a hugely problematic one, it also is a dedicated machine whose sole purpose is keeping the other machines running. Which feels wrong to me. It probably wasn't the best business decision to invest time in this, and I won't even argue this is the best technical solution. But it's the only technical solution that didn't make me feel like I was working around limitations; things just worked they way they were supposed to. The API servers received an event, they told the WebSockets servers about it. It felt very conceptually pure to me. I'm a sucker for that.
  - JulianMorrison 14y ago
    To get the reply on a deep comment, click "link" first to get the comment as a single page, and "reply" will be there. Doozer is only slightly a SPF, it has high availability by having multi-master replication. It's also not doing a lot of communicating, or a lot of CPU work, and it keeps its data in RAM, so it may be OK for it to live on a non-dedicated machine. Sorry if I come across as criticizing your admittedly cool creation. It was just that you said there weren't alternatives, and I knew of one.
    - paddyforan 14y ago
      No, I definitely appreciate the conversation, because I looked for forever for a pre-built solution to this, and couldn't figure out how nobody had needed a solution before now. So I'm glad there are solutions, and I'm not just crazy.

JulianMorrison 14y ago

Heh, thanks. The mailing list suggests http://github.com/4ad/doozer http://github.com/4ad/doozer and http://github.com/4ad/doozerd http://github.com/4ad/doozerd are being maintained as forks of the original. Or there's Zookeeper. Or brew your own central lookup server using 0mq that does the same job of "set a key, get a key, notify subscribers when it changes". It's a single point of failure, but since the system will run fine without it (only lacking topology updates) it's not a hugely problematic one.

alexchamberlain 14y ago
Isn't the lookup server a SPoF?
paddyforan 14y ago
This reply link just appeared for me. Not cool -_- The lookup server is a single point of failure. And while it's not a hugely problematic one, it also is a dedicated machine whose sole purpose is keeping the other machines running. Which feels wrong to me. It probably wasn't the best business decision to invest time in this, and I won't even argue this is the best technical solution. But it's the only technical solution that didn't make me feel like I was working around limitations; things just worked they way they were supposed to. The API servers received an event, they told the WebSockets servers about it. It felt very conceptually pure to me. I'm a sucker for that.
- JulianMorrison 14y ago
  To get the reply on a deep comment, click "link" first to get the comment as a single page, and "reply" will be there. Doozer is only slightly a SPF, it has high availability by having multi-master replication. It's also not doing a lot of communicating, or a lot of CPU work, and it keeps its data in RAM, so it may be OK for it to live on a non-dedicated machine. Sorry if I come across as criticizing your admittedly cool creation. It was just that you said there weren't alternatives, and I knew of one.
  - paddyforan 14y ago
    No, I definitely appreciate the conversation, because I looked for forever for a pre-built solution to this, and couldn't figure out how nobody had needed a solution before now. So I'm glad there are solutions, and I'm not just crazy.