I've regarded RabbitMQ as a secret weapon in plain sight for years. The killer reason people don't use it more is it "doesn't scale" to truly enormous sizes, but for anyone with less than a million users it's great. Too many people end up with their own half rolled pubsub via things like grpc, and they'd be far better off using this, particularly in the early stages of development.
How do you manage schema for exchanges, queues, and routing? The pattern seems to be for each client to set up the schema for the parts they touch before hand, but that doesn't scale well. The schema ends up siloed in each project and nobody knows what the current state should be.
RabbitMQ 4.0
31–40 of 120 posts
Re: RabbitMQ 4.0
#32Re: RabbitMQ 4.0
#33I've regarded RabbitMQ as a secret weapon in plain sight for years. The killer reason people don't use it more is it "doesn't scale" to truly enormous sizes, but for anyone with less than a million users it's great. Too many people end up with their own half rolled pubsub via things like grpc, and they'd be far better off using this, particularly in the early stages of development.
The real reason people don't use it is because they don't know about it or understand it. Then they apply the "it doesn't scale" retroactively. You have to read a lot of docs or you WILL hold RabbitMQ wrong.
The ideal RMQ cluster has 3 servers and is dedicated to just a few apps.
Re: RabbitMQ 4.0
#34I've regarded RabbitMQ as a secret weapon in plain sight for years. The killer reason people don't use it more is it "doesn't scale" to truly enormous sizes, but for anyone with less than a million users it's great. Too many people end up with their own half rolled pubsub via things like grpc, and they'd be far better off using this, particularly in the early stages of development.
Just wondering what the biggest selling points are for somebody making a decision?
Re: RabbitMQ 4.0
#35I've regarded RabbitMQ as a secret weapon in plain sight for years. The killer reason people don't use it more is it "doesn't scale" to truly enormous sizes, but for anyone with less than a million users it's great. Too many people end up with their own half rolled pubsub via things like grpc, and they'd be far better off using this, particularly in the early stages of development.
The new Khepri metadata store in RabbitMQ 4.0 allows for even better scalability.
Re: RabbitMQ 4.0
#36I've regarded RabbitMQ as a secret weapon in plain sight for years. The killer reason people don't use it more is it "doesn't scale" to truly enormous sizes, but for anyone with less than a million users it's great. Too many people end up with their own half rolled pubsub via things like grpc, and they'd be far better off using this, particularly in the early stages of development.
Earlier this year I tried setting it up as a websockets message broker in a Spring Boot app but failed miserably. I ended up using Spring’s simple broker.
Re: RabbitMQ 4.0
#37I've regarded RabbitMQ as a secret weapon in plain sight for years. The killer reason people don't use it more is it "doesn't scale" to truly enormous sizes, but for anyone with less than a million users it's great. Too many people end up with their own half rolled pubsub via things like grpc, and they'd be far better off using this, particularly in the early stages of development.
Re: RabbitMQ 4.0
#38does celery work with this out of the box?
https://docs.celeryq.dev/en/stable/getting-started/backends-...
Re: RabbitMQ 4.0
#39I've regarded RabbitMQ as a secret weapon in plain sight for years. The killer reason people don't use it more is it "doesn't scale" to truly enormous sizes, but for anyone with less than a million users it's great. Too many people end up with their own half rolled pubsub via things like grpc, and they'd be far better off using this, particularly in the early stages of development.
Re: RabbitMQ 4.0
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've never used RabbitMQ, but NATS supports clustering, super clustering, and leaf node connections. I'm guessing the latter is the closest to what would be considered "federation" in this context. Edit: spelling
None of them are close. RabbitMQ has traffic shaping, MQ->MQ routing (federation), and all sorts of stuff that is super important if you use it as a generalized routing system (vs plain IP). NATS doesn't have that and it's almost certainly firmly out of scope.