On Thursday, September 15, 2016, Keisuke Miyako <[email protected]> wrote:
> actually, I beg to differ on this. > > inter-process variables, yes, I suppose you can work around them. > > but I have not yet found a good way to write worker code without using > process variables. > > Right, I said something stupid. I think that's the technical term ;-) I was only thinking of process vars used for IP communication with the set/get commands. Within a worker? Whatever works. If you scale out to a larger system, you have to consider what works there. If you're in another language, the code will be a complete rewrite anyway. Put more succinctly, I'm saying * limit messages to parameters * if you expect to move beyond the built-in feature set, consolidate on a JSON block (real JSON for interopability) * if you need to pass something large or unwieldy, stick it in a resource and pass the resource reference in the JSON. If you do all of that and later find you want to run jobs in Python using SQS, you'll be in good shape. For 'SQS', insert your queue name here and for 'Python', insert your language. Everything speaks HTTP, SQL, and JSON these days. ********************************************************************** 4D Internet Users Group (4D iNUG) FAQ: http://lists.4d.com/faqnug.html Archive: http://lists.4d.com/archives.html Options: http://lists.4d.com/mailman/options/4d_tech Unsub: mailto:[email protected] **********************************************************************
