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

The software works excellently in a development environment and performs well when running as a single instance. However, I encountered issues when scaling it up for high availability in a clustered setup. The system would fail inconsistently, with two masters consuming messages simultaneously, which wasn't ideal for my use case. Eventually, I switched to Kafka and haven't revisited the original solution since.

It's worth noting that these issues might have been due to my improper configuration. Nevertheless, if the configuration process is fraught with pitfalls, that's problematic in itself. I've had these experiences more than once.

Additionally, I found a critical race condition in the Python library, rendering it practically unusable for me. I submitted a bug report with a minimal example demonstrating the issue. I considered fixing it myself, but since using RabbitMQ wasn't crucial for my project, I switched to ZeroMQ, which didn't require a broker. The issue was acknowledged and fixed about a year later. At the time, I had to assume that nobody else was using the Python bindings.

Three years ago, I worked on a project that used the software for a Celery queue. Messages would occasionally go missing, although this could have been a configuration issue on our part. Ultimately, we replaced it with a Redis queue (not the best practice, I admit) and didn't look back. This was for a lower-availability use case where a single instance of Redis sufficed.



Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

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

Search: