I guess the biggest difference I see people talking about when talking messaging and job queues is that with messaging they expect all workers to receive all messages. With the 'normal' beanstalkd usage as a job queue, we expect each worker to see a single 'next job' message while avoiding all the duplicates. The job queue doesn't work as well for one to many subscribers, which it seems many people use queue/messaging systems for.
The fact that beanstalkd is used for queuing FIFO made sense to me, but with many other projects focusing on the one to many queues (which really seems like setting up multiple queues, one for every subscriber), it might be good to try to clarify the wording a bit on the site. Just my 2 cents. peace,, Dan Mayer Co-founder, Devver.net (http://devver.net) http://twitter.com/devver http://mayerdan.com http://twitter.com/danmayer On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Keith Rarick <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 9:07 AM, Erich <[email protected]> wrote: >> In case you haven't come across it yet, beanstalk is mentioned in >> this: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Message_Queue_Evaluation_Notes >> page. It's been making the rounds at link site (hn, reddit etc). Most >> of the stuff they say is reasonably accurate, however they completely >> ignored half of the python clients in their eval, and a few other >> blatant inaccuracies. ... > > That's interesting. Yeah, it seems like they didn't put a whole lot of > effort into their look at beanstalk. > >> The thing that gets me tho, is that beanstalk was even included in >> that discussion. The article is about messaging (MoM/(enterprise) >> message busses/ message queues), not about jobs. > > I can understand where the confusion arises. The two services are > pretty similar in most ways. Personally, I'm fine with it if people > want to use beanstalkd as a message bus. I'm even willing to make > changes to help out that use case as long as they don't impair > beanstalkd's central function as a work queue. > > Besides, it's arguably just semantics. You could view "delivery of a > message" as a job to do, making messaging a subset of work queues. :) > >> ... >> Anyway, rambling aside, I am wondering if maybe the description of >> beanstalk should change on the site to indicate it is a distributed >> fifo instead of a second rate message bus. > > We could just explicitly mention that it's designed as a work queue, > not a message bus, though of course people are free to use (or abuse) > it any way they wish. > > kr > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "beanstalk-talk" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/beanstalk-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
