zlacker

[return to "Launch HN: Hatchet (YC W24) – Open-source task queue, now with a cloud version"]
1. krick+RD1[view] [source] 2024-06-28 02:55:53
>>abelan+(OP)
Can somebody explain why would I use it instead a simple Redis/SQS/Postgres queue implemented in 50 LOC (+ some grafana panel for monitoring) (which is pretty much mandatory even for a wrapper of this or any other service)? I'm not trying to mock it, it's a serious question. What is implied by "task queue" that makes it worth bothering to use a dedicated service?
◧◩
2. barrel+3O1[view] [source] 2024-06-28 05:12:38
>>krick+RD1
I have a bunch of different queues that used SAQ (~50 LoC for the whole setup) and deployed it to production. A lot of them use LLMs, and when one of them failed it was near impossible to debug. Every workflow has over a dozen connected tasks, and every task can run on over a dozen separate rows before completing... I was spending hours in log files (often unsuccessfully)

The dashboard in Hatchet has a great GUI where you can navigate between all the tasks, see how they all connect, see the data passed in to each one, see the return results from each task, and each one has a log box you can print information to. You can rerun tasks, override variables, trigger identical workflows, filter tasks by metadata

It's dramatically reduced the amount of time it takes me to spot, identify, and fix bugs. I miss the simplicity of SAQ but that's the reason I switched and it's paid off already

◧◩◪
3. yuppie+IS1[view] [source] 2024-06-28 06:19:12
>>barrel+3O1
Is that a problem with the underlying infrastructure though? Im not seeing how using postgres queues would solve your issue... Instead it seems like an issue with your client lib, SAQ not providing the appropriate tooling to debug.

FWIW, Ive used both dramatiq/celery with redis in heavy prod environments and never had an issue with debugging. And Im having a tough time understanding how switching the underlying queue infrastructure would have made my life easier.

[go to top]