Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Why do message queue-based architectures seem less popular now?

news.ycombinator.com

371–376 of 376 posts

Re: Ask HN: Why do message queue-based architectures seem less popular now?

#371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not GP or specifically Airflow user; but my approach is to have a fixed job graph, and unnecessary jobs immediately succeed. And indeed, jobs are external executables, with all the skip/no skip logic executed therein. If nothing else, it makes it easy to understand what actually happened and when - just look at job logs.

I’m working on similar system. My plan is to have multiple terminal states for the tasks: Closed - Passed Closed - Failed Closed - Waived When you hit that Waived state, it should include a note explaining why it was waived. This could be “parent transaction dropped below threshold amount, so we don’t need this control” or “Executive X signed off on it”. I’m not sure about the auto-skip thing you propose, just from a…

I think of jobs rather as of prerequisites. If a prerequisite is somehow automatically satisfied (dunno, only back up on Mondays, and today is Tuesday) then it succeeds immediately. There is no "skipping". Wfm.

I find embedding logic into DSLs usually quite painful and less portable than having a static job graph and all the logic firmly in my own code.

Re: Ask HN: Why do message queue-based architectures seem less popular now?

#372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's kind of mind boggling just how powerful mundane desktop computers have gotten, let alone server hardware. Think about it: That 20 core CPU (eg: i7 14700K) you can buy for just a couple hundred dollars today would have been supercomputer hardware costing tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars just a decade ago.

According to geekbench, an i9 4790 processor released a decade ago is ~5 times slower than i7 14700. 4790's go for $30 at ebay, vs $300 for 14700, so price/performance seems to be in favor of older hardware:)

You might like https://labgopher.com/

Re: Ask HN: Why do message queue-based architectures seem less popular now?

#373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's kind of mind boggling just how powerful mundane desktop computers have gotten, let alone server hardware. Think about it: That 20 core CPU (eg: i7 14700K) you can buy for just a couple hundred dollars today would have been supercomputer hardware costing tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars just a decade ago.

The RAM also get much larger and cheaper, and it is now possible to have several terabyte (TB) of RAM memory (not storage), in a single PC or workstation. This i7 14700K can support 192 GB RAM but other lower end Xeon CPU W for workstation for example w3-2423 costing around USD350 can support 2 TB RAM albeit only 6-core [1]. But then with not so much more extra budgets you can scale the machine to your heart's conten…

Good point. And going back to the start of this thread, you can put a whole lot of Postgre into a machine with even a few hundred gigs of RAM.

Re: Ask HN: Why do message queue-based architectures seem less popular now?

#374
I use web hooks now and they work really well for asynchronous situations. Spinning up a base app in node to do this is super simple and much easier to maintain than doing it in a kafka message bus.

Nice to see so many developers owning up to the "resume building" and being pragmatic about solving human/business problems versus technology for the sake of it.

Re: Ask HN: Why do message queue-based architectures seem less popular now?

#375
post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What the data consistency story around crashes ? Backup/recovery ?

Sorry, I'm not sure I understand your question. Can you rephrase?

Presumably you have backups for both the primary database and the message queue (or maybe no backup for the later). If a disaster happens, requiring you to restore backups, how confident are you that your system as a whole is behaving as expected (no events acknowledged but not processed / no events processed twice).

Re: Ask HN: Why do message queue-based architectures seem less popular now?

#376
post #90

It’s because they were billed as a way to reduce complexity but in reality just added a ton. The fundamental issue with event driven architecture is getting out of sync with the source of truth. Every single design doc I’ve seen in an organization pitching event driven architecture has overlooked the sync issue and ultimately been bitten by it.

can you explain how event driven is getting out of sync? my understanding is that you pipe data change events right into queue, after each and every change, so in theory your application should reflect all changes in near real-time. it will only go out of sync if your kafka consumers lag behind producers really really bad, and cannot process what is being produced fast enough

Events get missed for all kinds of reasons, having perfect delivery is basically impossible
Post reply on HN