"Used message queue as replacement for RPC service without actually implementing RPC pattern." Key learned from inevitable failure? Message queues are BAD! E

"Used message queue as replacement for RPC service without actually implementing RPC pattern." Key learned from inevitable failure? Message queues are BAD! Except for the part where you weren't actually testing an MQ, you were trying to use an MQ as an RPC service without actually solving the problem and instead insisted on building an RPC service with none of the failure-tolerance of a persistent broker. I don't disagree with the OP that this is a common mistake, but the solution offered is more of a "we also made this mistake, so clearly it is a problem with MQs and not us!" which isn't actually true. Additionally, MQs are really (IMO) a better fit for systems that either have a measurable level of complexity on writes or are lightly written but heavily read. You see the same general pattern failure with people who insist that RDBMS is The Answer(tm) even though the data they write/read isn't relational and often read-heavy.