Backstory and caveats: > Losing Data and NIH > You can lose data on crash and there is no replication, so you have to orchestrate that yourself doing double writes or something. > The super simple architecture allows for all kidnds of hacks to do backups/replication/sharding but you have to do those yourself. > My usecase is ok with losing some data, and we dont have money to pay for kafka+zk+monitoring(kafka,zk), no…
I'm scratching my head about "we dont have money to pay for kafka+zk+monitoring(kafka,zk)". Kafka and Zookeeper are both open source. As are monitoring and alerting tools such as Prometheus. Surely the hosting and storage costs are similar. So what does this project offer its creator, other than a great deal of infrastructural debt and all the latent bugs of a roll-your-own solution that lacks a community?
Me and my team understands the 300 lines of code that go into rochefort and can twist and modify it for our needs.
Performance will make or break our startup, which deals with real time user behaviour analytics, and doing high performant java for a while, I know very well how much time I will have to spend looking at G1 logs to fine tune it.
I am sure we wont use rochefort after we scale up, but for now I think gives us greather velocity than kafka (just because if we want to modify kafka we have to spend a week on a simple change).
I want to be able to add more meta information in the header, or read the files from another process, rsync and read them to my laptop, add custom reducers etc, all those things will take me minutes with rochefort and days with kafka.