I wasn't on the team that did the work, but I was involved in some of the early discussions. Some advantages of Redis over SQS for our purposes:
* Better supported by Celery (e.g. monitoring) * Less tied to AWS-specific infrastructure, but there's still an AWS-managed option in ElastiCache * In the longer term, we could replace Memcached with Redis, giving us a more flexible cache and reducing the number of technologies needed to set up and run Open edX. Take care. Dave On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 3:55 AM, Matjaz Gregoric <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello, > > EdX has moved to Redis as the queuing backend for celery. > > Was SQS ever evaluated as a possible replacement for RabbitMQ? If it was, > what were the reasons edX chose Redis instead? > > I am not questioning the decision at all, I'm just curious what the > drawbacks of SQS are. > > Thanks, > -- > Matjaz Gregoric > @OpenCraft > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "General Open edX discussion" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ > msgid/edx-code/CALNP4Ff0JxYL6bcWMENHpTXOSfbP%2B8bwPYxv07FzDU1-dvwJpA% > 40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/edx-code/CALNP4Ff0JxYL6bcWMENHpTXOSfbP%2B8bwPYxv07FzDU1-dvwJpA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "General Open edX discussion" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/edx-code/CAO_oFPwqE22_GYMhj2Nq96EM9cPsd%2B6_ji9TCO40v%3DXdODB3Kg%40mail.gmail.com.
