3 ms·
I'm a little unclear on this. You say it's a replacement for Temporal, but the GitHub repo says it's a replacement for the temporal python client SDK? Then in
by unsnap_biceps 4mo ago
I'm a little unclear on this. You say it's a replacement for Temporal, but the GitHub repo says it's a replacement for the temporal python client SDK?
Then in the description you say "This lets you run durable workflows, activities, signals, updates, retries, and recovery without needing any infrastructure except Postgres." but your diagram shows worker nodes outside of the Postgres server, so you do need infrastructure beyond the Postgres instance?
- lmz 4mo agoI think "without needing any infrastructure" is in contrast to Temporal, which has its own server in front of the storage.
- lelandbatey 4mo agoI asked the DBOS folks about this before; the idea is that there is no "coordination node", only the workers and the DB. See DBOS folks previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45186494 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45186494
- KraftyOne 4mo agoExactly, Postgres as an orchestrator instead of a Temporal server as an orchestrator. This page goes into more detail (for DBOS, but DBOSify is the same principle but using the Temporal API directly): https://docs.dbos.dev/explanations/comparing-temporal https://docs.dbos.dev/explanations/comparing-temporal
- swyx 4mo ago(ex temporal employee) believe it or not this is SIMPLER than temporal's actual workers. what you're seeing is a "DBOSify worker" embedded in each application server, which is not the same thing as temporal's conception of workers (which are separate from the app server). i havent spent much time with dbosify but i'd say this is closer to a "second client" than a full worker... just a terminology issue