zlacker

[parent] [thread] 4 comments
1. fsaint+(OP)[view] [source] 2019-05-27 12:08:17
Tables as queues is perfectly legit, one less component to worry about.
replies(2): >>actuat+b1 >>Stavro+W1
2. actuat+b1[view] [source] 2019-05-27 12:19:30
>>fsaint+(OP)
One more advantage it gives is you can have pretty easy job guarantees through the database transactions.
3. Stavro+W1[view] [source] 2019-05-27 12:26:55
>>fsaint+(OP)
Does anyone have any rough performance numbers on each approach? I'll only use DB tables when I don't want to deploy Redis (which I usually do, as a cache or whatever), and I'll use RabbitMQ for more "serious" projects. On small projects, I'll even forgo Redis and use the DB as a cache too, which works pretty well.

What do y'all do?

replies(1): >>ramraj+6l
◧◩
4. ramraj+6l[view] [source] [discussion] 2019-05-27 15:23:14
>>Stavro+W1
My job queue requirements have been very modest (less than ten jobs per hour) and no more than 2 or 3 workers. I also generally have redis deployed but it never occurred to me to use it given it's "ephemeral" nature - always remained paranoid that services on the cloud should always be assumed to go down at any time
replies(1): >>Stavro+Ml
◧◩◪
5. Stavro+Ml[view] [source] [discussion] 2019-05-27 15:28:53
>>ramraj+6l
I generally agree, but I have Redis as part of my main stack now, and it's been pretty solid. I'm fairly distrustful of "cloud" services, though, so I run my stuff on Hetzner and manage them myself. For my revenues, where a day's downtime might cost me $5/mo in lost revenue, I think it makes more sense.
[go to top]