3 ms·

I used the examples from the original article. I think the OP ported an EventMachine code to Node. When I said 'Java' I really meant JVM. Specifically I'm usin

by jondot 14y ago

I used the examples from the original article. I think the OP ported an EventMachine code to Node. When I said 'Java' I really meant JVM. Specifically I'm using Scala. Regardless, I have a different Clojure based project, with it as well, I prefer doing what clojure has to offer in terms of concurrency (pmap, etc). I have dipped a toe in Go. Loved the fact that you get a compiled binary, ecosystem still feels skinny. Ended up concluding that in a year or two it'll be worth revisiting.

continuations 14y ago
If you're already using Scala, why do you need Node? What does Node give you that a Scala async framework like Play or Scalatra doesn't? Also what does Ruby give you that Scala doesn't? Just wondering why do you choose to use 3 stacks (Ruby, Scala, Node) when one could be enough.
- jondot 14y ago
  I'll also try to address sandGordon's question. Like superfeeder, I have "backend" services, but I also have client-facing services. I value how Node.js handles slow clients. It also services some more 'utility' use cases for me, such as reverse proxies, etc. JRuby and Scala cover IO bound processing for me over the Web. JRuby covers the majority of the backend services. I use Scala coupled with Storm, and I could have used JRuby here too, but you can also use JRuby with Hadoop and you typically don't. Since this use case actually required the optimization (I wasn't prematurely optimizing), I went as bare metal as possible (ruled Java out, yes). Previously, this service was a Node.js service and got rewritten into Scala+Storm. I don't use Akka because I didn't feel it was needed yet. Old school threaded workers with JRuby works fine so far. I know that Scala is supposed to be a multi-layered solution and it can handle all of this. However, Ruby and Node brings the ecosystem Scala doesn't have (I'm not moved by the "but Java has a million Jars out there" argument, already integrating with them with JRuby). And in general Ruby makes me happy (SBT makes me very very angry and sad, for comparison - yet Scala is OK), that simple.

by jondot 14y ago

continuations 14y ago

If you're already using Scala, why do you need Node? What does Node give you that a Scala async framework like Play or Scalatra doesn't? Also what does Ruby give you that Scala doesn't? Just wondering why do you choose to use 3 stacks (Ruby, Scala, Node) when one could be enough.

jondot 14y ago
I'll also try to address sandGordon's question. Like superfeeder, I have "backend" services, but I also have client-facing services. I value how Node.js handles slow clients. It also services some more 'utility' use cases for me, such as reverse proxies, etc. JRuby and Scala cover IO bound processing for me over the Web. JRuby covers the majority of the backend services. I use Scala coupled with Storm, and I could have used JRuby here too, but you can also use JRuby with Hadoop and you typically don't. Since this use case actually required the optimization (I wasn't prematurely optimizing), I went as bare metal as possible (ruled Java out, yes). Previously, this service was a Node.js service and got rewritten into Scala+Storm. I don't use Akka because I didn't feel it was needed yet. Old school threaded workers with JRuby works fine so far. I know that Scala is supposed to be a multi-layered solution and it can handle all of this. However, Ruby and Node brings the ecosystem Scala doesn't have (I'm not moved by the "but Java has a million Jars out there" argument, already integrating with them with JRuby). And in general Ruby makes me happy (SBT makes me very very angry and sad, for comparison - yet Scala is OK), that simple.