3 ms·
Tbh, I'd have preferred a synchronous replication option for Redis nodes. That seems to be essentially the "improvement" in Disque and it'd be easier to maintai
by fweespeech 12y ago
Tbh, I'd have preferred a synchronous replication option for Redis nodes. That seems to be essentially the "improvement" in Disque and it'd be easier to maintain two replication nodes than two separate projects imo.
- antirez 12y agoHello, Redis + sync repl is a valid point of view IMHO, there are reasons why this was discarded, but it is definitely an option. However Redis + sync replication does not give you Disque at all. Disque is a specialized distributed system hard to simulate with Redis, nodes runs protocols in order to coordinate re-queueing the message, in order to federate to route messages, and so forth.
- fweespeech 12y agoFair enough. :) I am basically using something I could fit in Redis + sync replication [in terms of data model / function] as a job queue presently so I suppose that is just where my mind jumps to.