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

RabbitMQ 4.0

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 120 posts

Re: RabbitMQ 4.0

#61

Post by Alupis »

nesarkvechnep wrote: post #5
fidotron wrote: post #3

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.

Erlang is a secret weapon.

Probably better said as "BEAM is a secret weapon".

BEAM languages (including Elixir and Gleam) share the benefits Erlang enjoys by also being part of the ecosystem.

Re: RabbitMQ 4.0

#62

Post by nurettin »

cogman10 wrote: post #33
datavirtue wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I agree, but there are a lot of footguns with RMQ. A great example of one is that you'll slow down your cluster by adding more RMQ servers (something that's bit us in the past). Which is a forgivable mistake as most people would expect that more cores == faster RMQ. (For RMQ, that doesn't work because Durable messages need to be replicated to the other nodes in the cluster. More nodes == more replication) The ideal R…

The most common elephant foot gun in the room is buggy processes letting queues grow.

RMQ immediately slows down (due to mnesia causing delays) and processes start dropping messages despite having system resources to grow.

Re: RabbitMQ 4.0

#64

Post by Alupis »

zedpm wrote: post #47
RadiozRadioz wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you said that number, I had a completely different reaction. 20 messages per second is absolutely nothing, $0.50 per day for that is dreadful. A $5 per month ($0.16 per day) VPS can deliver many thousands of messages per second.

$10/month difference is, to use your phrasing, absolutely nothing. It's not worth anyone's time to make that switch unless it's some toy app paid for out of pocket.

Most software businesses start off as "toy apps" and are paid for out of pocket.

The parent's comment is right - that is a lot of money for not a lot of value, particularly when you are early stage.

The trick is in finding balance between paying ridiculous fees (relative to your revenue/customer base) to make things more simple vs. find another way and spend your time instead.

A prime example are identify provider services, such as Auth0. The free tier is good enough for development, but as soon as you expect to onboard customers the free tier starts to feel deliberately gimped. Are you willing to spend $20 a month just to use a custom login domain? For the zero customers you have? $20 a month might feel like "nothing", but it's $20 a month forever and it's $20 a month that could be allocated to other things, such as compute or your accounting software.

It's not always that clear cut, however.

Re: RabbitMQ 4.0

#65

Post by bankcust08385 »

fidotron wrote: post #3

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.

The anti-pattern to be avoided is cobbling together a nonperformant grand centralized ESB and making it a SPoF and bottleneck for everything, but it depends entirely on the use-case. MQTT scales to millions of devices for low data rates. ZK works well for little bits of coherent distributed cluster metadata. Kafka has its niches. ZMQ helps in others.

Re: RabbitMQ 4.0

#66

Post by bankcust08385 »

brightball wrote: post #34
fidotron wrote: post #3

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.

Is there a big advantage over Redis? Just coming from the Ruby world I know Sidekiq is extremely popular as a Redis backed queue. I know there's a RabbitMQ backed queue called Sneakers that's gained a lot of popularity as well though. Just wondering what the biggest selling points are for somebody making a decision?

Redis is slow and doesn't scale out well. Couchbase used to be a decent choice but it went commercial pseudo-FOSS.

Re: RabbitMQ 4.0

#67

Post by Iwan-Zotow »

atombender wrote: post #45
shandor wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So how about NATS compared to RabbitMQ? If building from scratch, what would drive a design or team towards NATS?

Two different models. The metaphor I like to use is that RabbitMQ is a postal system, while NATS is a switchboard. RabbitMQ is a "classical" message broker. It routes messages between queues. Messages are treated like little letters that fly everywhere. They're filed in different places, and consumers come by and pick them up. Core NATS isn't really a message broker, but more of a network transport. There are no queu…

Great, thatnk you

Re: RabbitMQ 4.0

#68

Post by infecto »

RadiozRadioz wrote: post #43
declan_roberts wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's like $0.50/day in aws costs. Absolutely no reason to switch if it's working.

When you said that number, I had a completely different reaction. 20 messages per second is absolutely nothing, $0.50 per day for that is dreadful. A $5 per month ($0.16 per day) VPS can deliver many thousands of messages per second.

When I read this message I think this an absolutely terrible waste of time for a startup/small company. I want to spend my time building features not infrastructure.

Re: RabbitMQ 4.0

#69

Post by infecto »

Alupis wrote: post #64
zedpm wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$10/month difference is, to use your phrasing, absolutely nothing. It's not worth anyone's time to make that switch unless it's some toy app paid for out of pocket.

Most software businesses start off as "toy apps" and are paid for out of pocket. The parent's comment is right - that is a lot of money for not a lot of value, particularly when you are early stage. The trick is in finding balance between paying ridiculous fees (relative to your revenue/customer base) to make things more simple vs. find another way and spend your time instead. A prime example are identify provider se…

I think it is fairly clear. If you are building a product of passion that you may tinker with for years, by all means cut costs as much as possible.

If you are an actual early stage venture I don't believe those costs meet a high enough threshold to matter.

Re: RabbitMQ 4.0

#70

Post by Alupis »

infecto wrote: post #69
Alupis wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most software businesses start off as "toy apps" and are paid for out of pocket. The parent's comment is right - that is a lot of money for not a lot of value, particularly when you are early stage. The trick is in finding balance between paying ridiculous fees (relative to your revenue/customer base) to make things more simple vs. find another way and spend your time instead. A prime example are identify provider se…

I think it is fairly clear. If you are building a product of passion that you may tinker with for years, by all means cut costs as much as possible. If you are an actual early stage venture I don't believe those costs meet a high enough threshold to matter.

It depends, as things usually do.

$20 here, $10 there, eventually ends up as $600 monthly or more, and no customer anywhere in sight. That may, or may not be sustainable or make sense.

Flush with cash? Knock yourself out. Bootstrapping? You can spend that money a lot more effectively than just loading up on a bunch of overpriced SaaS products to make life easier. You have to earn the easy route by growing your revenue.

Post reply on HN