Bill Ricker wrote: > Michael isn't an expert on GearMan but essentially confirmed my response.
I wasn't really satisfied with the answer, because it sounded like he wasn't familiar with Gearman, never mind having done a head-to-head comparison. That's not Mike's fault - it just means he didn't run those comparisons, and thus can't answer the question. >Bill Ricker <[email protected]> wrote: >> Best Answer on Stack Overflow for this Q is - >> >>> I would say that Gearman is better for queuing "jobs" and >>> RabbitMQ is better for queuing "data". >> >> So, Ratchet wrenches and power screwdrivers, neither is better, use >> the right one at each need ? Sure, but there is a lot of overlap between the two. Both have distributed queues in common. One passes a message with data. The other passes a message with a job or method to be ran. (I don't recall how data gets passed along with Gearman. It may require an "out of band" mechanism, like a reference to a database record or file.) Practically speaking, both seem to get used for the same sorts of problems. So your analogy is not quite right, as wrenches and screwdrivers operate on different types of fasteners. A better analogy would be different types of wrenches. Both can do the same job, but are packaged up differently. That's not to say that the two tools are interchangeable. No doubt there are certain problems that are optimal for one or the other. One may also vastly outperform the other. It would be interesting to see a benchmark task implemented using both. On an anecdotal note, I see Gearman used more often on Perl projects, and some form of MQ used more often on Java projects. -Tom -- Tom Metro The Perl Shop, Newton, MA, USA "Predictable On-demand Perl Consulting." http://www.theperlshop.com/ _______________________________________________ Boston-pm mailing list [email protected] http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-pm
