Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> What level of technical due diligence was performed by organizations like Mastercard, Volvo, PayPal, Baidu, Alibaba, or AT&T before adopting this system?

I have to note the following as a NATS fan:

  - I am horrified at Jespen's reliability findings, however they do vindicate certain design decisions I made in the past

  - 'Core NATS' is really mostly 'redis pubsub but better' and Core NATS is honestly awesome, low friction middleware. I've used it as part of eventing systems in the past and it works great.

  - FWIW, There's an MQTT bridge that requires Jetstream, but if you're just doing QoS 0 you can work around the other warts.

  - If you use Jetstream KV as a cache layer without real persistence (i.e. closer to how one uses Redis KV where it's just memory backed) you don't care about any of this. And again Jetstream KV IMO is better than Redis KV since they added TTL.
All of that is a way to say, I'd bet a lot of them are using Core NATS or other specific features versus something like JetStream.

tl;dr - Jetstream's reliability is horrifying apparently but I stand by the statement that Core NATS and Ephermal KV is amazing.





Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: