←back to thread

66 points enether | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.924s | source

The space is confusing to say the least.

Message queues are usually a core part of any distributed architecture, and the options are endless: Kafka, RabbitMQ, NATS, Redis Streams, SQS, ZeroMQ... and then there's the “just use Postgres” camp for simpler use cases.

I’m trying to make sense of the tradeoffs between:

- async fire-and-forget pub/sub vs. sync RPC-like point to point communication

- simple FIFO vs. priority queues and delay queues

- intelligent brokers (e.g. RabbitMQ, NATS with filters) vs. minimal brokers (e.g. Kafka’s client-driven model)

There's also a fair amount of ideology/emotional attachment - some folks root for underdogs written in their favorite programming language, others reflexively dismiss anything that's not "enterprise-grade". And of course, vendors are always in the mix trying to steer the conversation toward their own solution.

If you’ve built a production system in the last few years:

1. What queue did you choose?

2. What didn't work out?

3. Where did you regret adding complexity?

4. And if you stuck with a DB-based queue — did it scale?

I’d love to hear war stories, regrets, and opinions.

Show context
wordofx ◴[] No.44019353[source]
Postgres. Doing ~ 70k messages/second average. Nothing huge but don’t need anything dedicated yet.
replies(3): >>44019364 #>>44019616 #>>44029804 #
iamcalledrob ◴[] No.44019616[source]
Curious what kind of hardware you're using for that 70K/s?
replies(1): >>44019699 #
1. wordofx ◴[] No.44019699[source]
It’s an r8g instance in aws. Can’t remember the size but I think it’s over provisioned because it’s at like 20% utilisation and only spikes to 50.