2 ms·
I wouldn't use either of those if you need durability.
by coolsunglasses 12y ago
I wouldn't use either of those if you need durability.
- arjie 12y agoWhat would you use? And why not RabbitMQ durable queues?
- tensor 12y agoProbably referring to: http://aphyr.com/posts/315-call-me-maybe-rabbitmq http://aphyr.com/posts/315-call-me-maybe-rabbitmq But all systems like this have weak points, just look at the other systems aphyr has analyzed.
- erichmond 12y agoKafka may be worth a look. It's the best message delivery system I've seen in the wild.
- hkarthik 12y agoAnyone using Kafka with AWS? I'm concerned that it won't be partition tolerant enough to use it there. http://aphyr.com/posts/293-call-me-maybe-kafka http://aphyr.com/posts/293-call-me-maybe-kafka We chose RabbitMQ, but we're achieving durability by storing messages in a backup database (CouchBase) that appears to handle partitions better. Still not ideal, and more complicated than we'd like.
- imperialWicket 12y agoThis isn't helpful. It's a perfectly valid question that even provides insight into some possible candidates. The candidates might not be the best options, but they commonly serve this purpose. What is it about RabbitMQ or Redis durability that you find lacking? What alternative do you recommend?
- tensor 12y agoI've looked and have not found any alternatives that are better.
- coolsunglasses 12y agoDid you rule out Kafka? If so, on what basis?