throwwgisgreat

3 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by throwwgisgreat 11mo ago

   > better behaviour than RabbitMQ since you can always re-read messages once they have been processed I can imagine, a 1 Billion dollar transaction accidentally gets processed by ten thousand client nodes due to a client app synchronizati
2. 2.▲
   by throwwgisgreat 11mo ago

   It would probably work fine, it would also put the jobs at risk of people who managed to convince their enterprises that a dumb but fast server (Kafka) was actually a good idea.
3. 3.▲
   by throwwgisgreat 11mo ago

   > processing billions of Kafka events per day Except that the burden is on all clients to coordinate to avoid processing an event more than once since Kakfa is a brainless invention just dumping data forever into a serial log.
4. 4.▲
   by throwwgisgreat 11mo ago

   > if we reverse: does Kafka also handle 80% of what Postgres does with 20% the effort? First, it would be inverse, not reverse. Second, no it doesn't work that way, that's the point of the Pareto principle in the first place, w
5. 5.▲
   by throwwgisgreat 11mo ago

   > Wireguard can't punch through NATs or firewalls without third party software like Tailscale. That's a false or incorrect statement, I've been using Wireguard and a cheap VPS (actually free on OCI) for several years, and