On Aug 8, 9:59 am, Fran <[email protected]> wrote: > > It has lots of dependencies (for example RabbitMQ) > > This is a little unfair - whilst RabbitMQ is the recommended Broker for > Production systems, there are many other supported & porting django-kombu to > web2py-kombu shouldn't be hard.
I agree. Our private discussions on the topic helped me understand better how celery works and what the needs of some users are. celery is great and django-celery ()ported to web2py) is fantastic too. Yet I found out that IF the communication between broker and workers is not a bottle neck (and often is not) and if you want to use django (or our case web2py) to schedule tasks, tasks have to be stored in database. So for small number of workers it is not a big overhead if they pick the tasks directly form the database. This is an enormous simplification. Yet is it so much simpler that it may actually scale well for many practical apps where you may have a few tasks/minute or less. The db used for the scheduler does not need to be the same used as main db thus reducing the load. Massimo
