stolsvik

15 ms·

121.
by stolsvik 4y ago
Well. My point is that messaging inherently have all these features, without needing any other tooling. The combination of transactionality and retrying is hard to achieve with REST, don't you think? It is actually pretty mesmerizing
122.
by stolsvik 4y ago
Thanks a bunch! Seriously. And I agree that AGPL is pretty harsh - I have a feeling that this is typically used in a "try before you buy" situation, where there is a commercial license on the side.
123.
by stolsvik 4y ago
To make a point out of it: This is not event based in the event sourcing way of thinking. It is using messages. You put a message on a queue, someone else picks it up. Mats implements a request/reply paradigm on top ("messaging
124.
by stolsvik 4y ago
I was referring to the "not open source". I edited my comment to be more specific.
125.
by stolsvik 4y ago
To your latter part: This is exactly the point: Using messages and queues makes the flows take whatever time it takes. Settling of the mentioned orders are not time critical - well, at least not in the way a request from a user sitting on h
126.
by stolsvik 4y ago
Hahaha, that's rough! :-) I'll tell you one thing: "What the hell does this actually do?!" is extremely spot on! I am close to amazed to how hard it is to explain this library. It really does provide value, but it is evi
127.
by stolsvik 4y ago
You are correct, this is meant as an AWS/GCP/Azure preventor. ElasticSearch situation. That is, AFAIU, the intention of the license I adopted. The "examples" part spells it pretty directly out, as I also try to do here:
128.
by stolsvik 4y ago
We clearly do not agree. Wrt. sync processing when using Mats: https://mats3.io/docs/sync-async-bridge/ But my better solution is instead to pull the async-ness all the way out to the client: https://ma
129.
by stolsvik 4y ago
Relying on the e.g. Servlet Container not being able to handle requests seems rather bad to me. That is a very rough error handling. We seem to have come to the exact opposite conclusions wrt. this. Your explanations are entirely in line wi
130.
by stolsvik 4y ago
I guess you'd say the same about cloud functions and lambdas, then? To which I agree. Paying per message would require the message cost to be pretty small. Might want to evaluate setting up a broker yourself if the cost starts getting
131.
by stolsvik 4y ago
Cadence is a workflow management system. As is Temporal, Apache Beam, Airbnb Airflow, Netflix Conductor, Spotify Luigi, and even things like Github Actions, Google Cloud Workflows, Azure Service Fabric, AWS SWF, Power Automate. A primary di
132.
by stolsvik 4y ago
"Not everybody is Google" These concepts has worked surprisingly well for us for nearly a decade. We're not Google-sized, but this architecture should work well for a few more orders of magnitude traffic. Also, you can mix an
133.
by stolsvik 4y ago
There is code here: https://mats3.io/docs/message-oriented-rpc/ .. and here: https://mats3.io/docs/mats-flow-initiation/ .. and here: https://mats3.io/docs/sync-asyn
134.
by stolsvik 4y ago
As far as I understand, Kafka is positioning itself to be the leading Event Sourcing solution. I view event sourcing to be fundamentally different from message passing. For a long time I tried to love event sourcing, but I see way to many
135.
by stolsvik 4y ago
This is unfair. I made Mats so that I could use messaging in a simpler form. Nothing else. Mats is an API that can be implemented on top of any queue-based message broker - which excludes Kafka. But it definitely includes ApacheMQ (which
136.
by stolsvik 4y ago
Hehe, okay. It was meant to mean "Each stage is processed in a transaction". Kinda hard to get down into a list. But my wording evidently didn't make anything clearer! If you read a few more pages, then it should hopefully be
137.
by stolsvik 4y ago
Isn't that more of the difference between JMS and AMQP?
138.
by stolsvik 4y ago
I see references to NATS multiple times, but I fail to see how it solves what Mats aims to solve? Mats could be implemented on top of NATS, i.e. use NATS as a backend, instead of JMS. (We use ActiveMQ as the broker)
139.
by stolsvik 4y ago
Well, I actually call Mats "Message-Oriented Async RPC".
140.
by stolsvik 4y ago
I will argue that this simplicity is exactly what Mats provides. At least that is the intention.
141.
by stolsvik 4y ago
Well, yes - there is nothing with Mats that you cannot do with any other communication form, if you code it up. When you say "register this as a work-item and give me an ID to check on its status", you've implemented a queue,
142.
by stolsvik 4y ago
I do not say that it is Open Source either. From the front page: "Free to use, source on github. Noncompete licensed - PolyForm Perimeter." Feel free to comment on this: Is this a complete deal breaker for all potential users?
143.
by stolsvik 4y ago
Not entirely my own: https://polyformproject.org/licenses/perimeter/1.0.0/ https://centiservice.com/license/
144.
by stolsvik 4y ago
Well, okay, you're right! It is nearly true, though. :) I've written a bit about it here: https://mats3.io/using-mats/transactions-and-redelivery/
145.
Async message-oriented systems vs. REST for inter-microservice communications(mats3.io)
213 points by stolsvik 4y ago|156 comments
146.
ChatGPT is as smart as the tool-using Cockatoo(twitter.com)
2 points by stolsvik 4y ago|0 comments
147.
by stolsvik 4y ago
That is an obvious feature, not a bug! This is so that you can delete images on your phone to reduce the use of absurdly expensive phone storage, while still retain your precious history in pictures on the server.
148.
Batching of Jobs When Using Messaging(mats3.io)
1 points by stolsvik 4y ago|0 comments
149.
by stolsvik 4y ago
What is the license I get? “Download”, well sure, but what can I do with it? Put it in an app? On a poster I sell? Ads?
150.
Mats3: Message-Oriented Async Remote Procedure Calls(github.com)
1 points by stolsvik 4y ago|0 comments

More ›