Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Deno Queues

deno.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 168 posts

Re: Deno Queues

#101

Post by londons_explore »

simonw wrote: post #67

I dug into the internals of the local, SQLite version of this just now and wrote up some notes here: https://til.simonwillison.net/deno/deno-kv#user-content-deno... The most interesting detail is probably the schema they're using for that: CREATE TABLE queue ( ts integer not null, id text not null, data blob not null, backoff_schedule text not null, keys_if_undelivered blob not null, primary key (ts, id) ); CREATE TA…

Is it not normally bad practice to have 2 tables with basically identical fields and move rows between them?

Isn't that exactly what indexes were designed for?

Re: Deno Queues

#102

Post by londons_explore »

> at least once semantics.

> user code.

A past life has taught me that users will never properly understand at-least-once semantics. Anytime you redeliver messages, you will get a flurry of user complaints and breakage.

Either you do the impossible and invent a way to do exactly-once semantics. Or you should always redeliver 0.1% of all messages, just so that users don't come to depend on messages being delivered once.

Re: Deno Queues

#103

Post by meowtimemania »

dackerlunghack wrote: post #91

With grand promises rode the ploy Venture capital, ahoy! We make a lovable product to capture audience Vendor lock them at the earliest convenience Hey look at our awesome developer experience Add ANSI and emojis and comments saying it’s genius Some next level tech, plebs just don’t get it Next round of funding, we’ve already spent it I took the big dough, got puppets and framed it R-O-I is bad though but layoffs gon…

chat gpt?

Re: Deno Queues

#104

Post by chewbacha »

londons_explore wrote: post #102

> at least once semantics. > user code. A past life has taught me that users will never properly understand at-least-once semantics. Anytime you redeliver messages, you will get a flurry of user complaints and breakage. Either you do the impossible and invent a way to do exactly-once semantics. Or you should always redeliver 0.1% of all messages, just so that users don't come to depend on messages being delivered onc…

Early SQS basically did this. I'm not sure if this was intentional or not but it quickly taught me to respect redelivery.

Re: Deno Queues

#107

Post by endisneigh »

leptons wrote: post #80
asim wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many people don't have experience with AWS or SQS and even those that do will still need to think about it. Deno is taking a batteries included approach which means the Dev can just import something and go. If someone provided equivalent libraries for the cloud then I'm sure people would adopt them. In the case of Deno I'm sure they've identified a common problem many Devs in their ecosystem have and are tackling it…

If Deno is only going after amateur devs by implementing simplistic features like this, then it will remain an amateur product. AWS/SQS may seem complex to some, but they are very powerful. Maybe Deno is doing what Apple did in the 80's by putting free Apple computers in classrooms - try to get new users hooked into their system and then they'll use it for life. Anyone doing anything serious with cloud computing is a…

> Anyone doing anything serious with cloud computing is already using AWS, or should be. I would rather put in the time to learn AWS (which is entirely free in many small use cases), so I won't build stuff in a toy system and then later realize I need something better.

So ridiculous.

Re: Deno Queues

#108

Post by andyferris »

zja wrote: post #85
dsherret wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Tying a language runtime to a specific KV interface which is tied to a specific hosted service is the opposite of forward thinking. This is not the case. The Deno runtime itself is not tied to the Deno Deploy hosting service. The KV feature in the Deno runtime can be used without the hosting service. You can read the details about how Deno KV works in the Deno runtime here: https://til.simonwillison.net/deno/deno-k…

> The KV feature in the Deno runtime can be used without the hosting service. But one writes to foundation, and the other writes to a sqlite file. You wouldn’t be able to self host an app written for Deno Deploy and have it work out of the box. Are there any plans to open source the KV backend so that people could host their own KV databases? Now that you can connect to remote Kv databases, I suppose someone could im…

Self-hosting should work with a change of configuration, no?

As someone mentioned elsewhere, they have documented the protocol, so yes you could reimplement your own remote KV store.

Re: Deno Queues

#109

Post by postalrat »

londons_explore wrote: post #101
simonw wrote: post #67

I dug into the internals of the local, SQLite version of this just now and wrote up some notes here: https://til.simonwillison.net/deno/deno-kv#user-content-deno... The most interesting detail is probably the schema they're using for that: CREATE TABLE queue ( ts integer not null, id text not null, data blob not null, backoff_schedule text not null, keys_if_undelivered blob not null, primary key (ts, id) ); CREATE TA…

Is it not normally bad practice to have 2 tables with basically identical fields and move rows between them? Isn't that exactly what indexes were designed for?

If one table had millions of rows and the other only a few dozen and you are querying the few dozen often then it could make sense to have two tables. Different database treat indexes with sparse data differently.

Re: Deno Queues

#110

Post by endisneigh »

dsherret wrote: post #71
paxys wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. Tying a language runtime to a specific KV interface which is tied to a specific hosted service is the opposite of forward thinking. In fact the tech industry has made a lot of progress away from vendor locked-in stacks, and this just reminds me of those. What is really the difference between Deno.KV being shipped as part of the runtime vs adding an `import KV` statement at the top of the file (which could…

> Tying a language runtime to a specific KV interface which is tied to a specific hosted service is the opposite of forward thinking. This is not the case. The Deno runtime itself is not tied to the Deno Deploy hosting service. The KV feature in the Deno runtime can be used without the hosting service. You can read the details about how Deno KV works in the Deno runtime here: https://til.simonwillison.net/deno/deno-k…

This is not true, you cannot run your own foundationdb server and use the kv service without reimplementing yourself in fdb
Post reply on HN