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

Amazon Launches New RabbitMQ Message Broker Service

aws.amazon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 78 posts

Re: Amazon Launches New RabbitMQ Message Broker Service

#51

Post by mazamats »

hardwaresofton wrote: post #50
sciurus wrote: post #42

RIP https://www.cloudamqp.com/

Nah, they support so many platforms and AWS is only one of them. I also think their Heroku business might actually benefit from this. Now they don't even have to manage the servers themselves -- they can essentially re-sell AWS's service with custom support if they wanted and charge customers to move the cost to Heroku's bill rather than AWS's (you'd be surprised how many do this).

Reselling AWS's offerings would cost more than running it on bare VM's, I'm sure they would be able to compete on price with them.

It also doesn't make sense to rewrite their current software which is probably abstracted for multi-cloud to support re-selling.

Re: Amazon Launches New RabbitMQ Message Broker Service

#52

Post by wojack2dot0 »

NathanKP wrote: post #24
slivanes wrote: post #8

Open source is free to do what you will, but how many PR's does AWS send back to origin?

Disclosure: I work at AWS and this is my personal opinion. I've seen growing levels of AWS contribution back to upstream projects over the past four years. Teams start out by operating a piece of software at scale, whether it is Redis, Kubernetes, etc. After they have operated it for a while they discover the bugs or performance issues, or customers of the service complain about something. At that point the team now…

Hey Thief, Which team you work on? Why would you cheer taking other people's work and defend the monetization? Do you publish PRs secretly pulling from public records, huh? You are not welcome here.

Re: Amazon Launches New RabbitMQ Message Broker Service

#53

Post by dilyevsky »

blobbers wrote: post #12
cosmodisk wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They must be laughing their sock off at the tops of FAANG: thousands upon thousands commit millions of hours to open source which they then run for a nice profit.

This is because reliability, ease of setup, and support are actually just as important as what is being run. If you're not using AWS you're not fully leveraging your software team, because that means you've got people spending time building and supporting these sorts of internal systems. That should only be done when you reach large scale, at which point people have leveraged other AWS synergies making it harder to e…

For some stacks - sure. There’re good number where you’ll run into scalability/cost problem fairly quickly

Re: Amazon Launches New RabbitMQ Message Broker Service

#54

Post by tluyben2 »

Offtopic: we are evaluating rabbit at the moment vs activemq; rabbit won for one detail: we need delayed messages (ex. publish {...} in 2h) and activemq seems to support those clustered while rabbit only on one node, which does not fit the business case (we cannot lose messages). I worked with rabbitmq before and it was great but this seems indeed an issue. Someone here with some insights?

Re: Amazon Launches New RabbitMQ Message Broker Service

#55

Post by hardwaresofton »

mazamats wrote: post #51
hardwaresofton wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah, they support so many platforms and AWS is only one of them. I also think their Heroku business might actually benefit from this. Now they don't even have to manage the servers themselves -- they can essentially re-sell AWS's service with custom support if they wanted and charge customers to move the cost to Heroku's bill rather than AWS's (you'd be surprised how many do this).

Reselling AWS's offerings would cost more than running it on bare VM's, I'm sure they would be able to compete on price with them. It also doesn't make sense to rewrite their current software which is probably abstracted for multi-cloud to support re-selling.

> Reselling AWS's offerings would cost more than running it on bare VM's, I'm sure they would be able to compete on price with them.

True -- I do think passing on the cost and taking a tiny margin with drastically reduced maintenance cost could be an attractive business model at scale though.

> It also doesn't make sense to rewrite their current software which is probably abstracted for multi-cloud to support re-selling.

I have no idea what their current software looks like, do you have any inside knowledge?

If they have abstracted, then they probably have multiple implementations of a similar API -- this is just changing one of them (or maybe even cloning it to reduce possibility of breakage). This might be as simple as just changing the AWS-specific provisioner to call out to AmazonMQ instead of EC2, or changing some code that generates terraform/pulumi scripts.

One thing I think they'd have to deal with is the fact that they support custom plugins that AmazonMQ may not.

Re: Amazon Launches New RabbitMQ Message Broker Service

#56

Post by mazamats »

hardwaresofton wrote: post #55
mazamats wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reselling AWS's offerings would cost more than running it on bare VM's, I'm sure they would be able to compete on price with them. It also doesn't make sense to rewrite their current software which is probably abstracted for multi-cloud to support re-selling.

> Reselling AWS's offerings would cost more than running it on bare VM's, I'm sure they would be able to compete on price with them. True -- I do think passing on the cost and taking a tiny margin with drastically reduced maintenance cost could be an attractive business model at scale though. > It also doesn't make sense to rewrite their current software which is probably abstracted for multi-cloud to support re-sell…

The backups are also something that would differ greatly, along with metrics that rely on internal APIs which AWS may not provide access to.

Like other AWS products (RDS, Elasticache), there’s limitations since they provide protocol interoperability with proprietary tech behind the scenes.

Re: Amazon Launches New RabbitMQ Message Broker Service

#57

Post by barumi »

blobbers wrote: post #12
cosmodisk wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They must be laughing their sock off at the tops of FAANG: thousands upon thousands commit millions of hours to open source which they then run for a nice profit.

This is because reliability, ease of setup, and support are actually just as important as what is being run. If you're not using AWS you're not fully leveraging your software team, because that means you've got people spending time building and supporting these sorts of internal systems. That should only be done when you reach large scale, at which point people have leveraged other AWS synergies making it harder to e…

> If you're not using AWS you're not fully leveraging your software team, because that means you've got people spending time building and supporting these sorts of internal systems.

This is simply not true at all, and flies in the face of real world usage.

The only concrete and objective selling point of AWS is it's global coverage of data centers, and the infrastructure they have in place aimed at delivering reliable global-scale web services.

The problem is that the companies who actually operate at such a scale and with such tight operational requirements can be counted with your fingers. That count then drops down to a fraction once you start to do a cost/benefit analysis.

The rest of the world is quite honestly engaged in cargo cult software development.

And no, doing AWS is not simpler nor more efficient. You might launch an EC2 instance with a couple of clicks, but to navigate a service designed with global scale and multiple levels of redundancy across the same service and with tight integration and dependency across half a dozen AWS offers which may or may not be redundant or competing... No, that is not simple or allows for any type of time efficiency.

Hell, with AWS you do not learn how to manage or operate Infrastructure. With AWS you learn the AWS dashboard,and learn pavlov reactions to which button you press if you hear an alarm. You never fully grasp the impact or the reaction of pressing a button, and you have absolutely no idea what impact that click will have on your monthly bill.

In contrast, if you need to run microservices chatting through a message broker then your system on OVH or Hetzner or any other barebones system will be comprised of a bunch of nodes where one of them runs RabbitMQ and everyone else points to the RabbitMQ node. You can get everything running from scratch on a cluster managed by Docker Swarm in about 15 to 20 minutes. In the end you have a far simpler service running for a fraction of the cost and ina far more manageable environment.

AWS is resume-driven development fueled by cargo cult development.

Re: Amazon Launches New RabbitMQ Message Broker Service

#58

Post by barumi »

pbz wrote: post #39
bryanrasmussen wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That should only be done when you reach large scale, at which point people have leveraged other AWS synergies making it harder to exit the platform. And then you're bleeding money!

And drowning in a sea of complexity...

I really doubt you have any real world experience with AWS if you try to sell it as a less complex alternative to anything,really. AWS is perhaps the most complex and arcane service provider ever, and is progressively getting worse by the way the service keeps growing and changing.

And no, learning a specific AWS service is not a solid career investment. Tell that to anyone who tried to learn CloudFormation and then SAM and now forget everything because AWS pushes you to use CDK.

Re: Amazon Launches New RabbitMQ Message Broker Service

#59

Post by malux85 »

bot41 wrote: post #18

Cloud computing seems to be a winner take all scenario. For example, if you use AWS and need a message broker service then you'll use this. If you use Azure, you'll use their version. Development seems like just hooking up this components. I can't tell if this is a good thing or a bad thing.

It’s a bad thing - whenever you cannot make a choice you become a slave to tyranny. Infra lock-in means you’re a slave to their whims (financial, legal, competitivenes, whatever)

This is justified by “less maintenance, and easier deployment” but the reality of the situation is, it’s not worth giving your freedom up for, and to a lesser degree - if your platform becomes popular, you end up spending the same amount of time tweaking and optimising to match the idiosyncrasies of their implementation anyway.

But the most important part is vendor lock-in, it’s bad.

Re: Amazon Launches New RabbitMQ Message Broker Service

#60

Post by twelve40 »

awinder wrote: post #30
bot41 wrote: post #18

Cloud computing seems to be a winner take all scenario. For example, if you use AWS and need a message broker service then you'll use this. If you use Azure, you'll use their version. Development seems like just hooking up this components. I can't tell if this is a good thing or a bad thing.

AWS has sqs & kinesis which are much better queueing options in that scenario where you’re in AWS doing new dev and can pick a technology. This is more likely to do with opening doors for large and complex applications that can’t be rewritten to come into the AWS cloud. Unsexy stuff but there’s some fun engineering to be done in that realm, if you find like puzzles and shitshows to be fun anyways :-)

how are those much better? if you use SQS and you write your code for it, then you are stuck on a proprietary platform. Also, SQS is super-basic and actually requires a bunch of code to do anything beyond trivial - although yes, it seems reliable and well-supported, at least from my experience. I was actually really waiting for AWS to support Rabbit since it seems to hit the right combo of features, usability and platform independence for me, and it looked friendlier than ActiveMQ.
Post reply on HN