Re: PG-MQ?

From: Steve Atkins <steve(at)blighty(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PG-MQ?
Date: 2007-06-19 22:01:20
Message-ID: FCC4C434-02A2-4CE3-ACDC-FCFAF754E4B3@blighty.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On Jun 19, 2007, at 2:45 PM, Chris Browne wrote:

> I'm seeing some applications where it appears that there would be
> value in introducing asynchronous messaging, ala "message queueing."
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Message_queue>

Me too.

> My bias would be to have something that can basically run as a thin
> set of stored procedures atop PostgreSQL :-). It would be trivial to
> extend that to support SOAP/XML-RPC, if desired.
>
> It would be nice to achieve 'higher availability' by having queues
> where you might replicate the contents (probably using the MQ system
> itself ;-)) to other servers.
>
> There tend to be varying semantics out there:
>
> - Some queues may represent "subscriptions" where a whole bunch of
> listeners want to get all the messages;
>
> - Sometimes you have the semantics where:
> - messages need to be delivered at least once
> - messages need to be delivered no more than once
> - messages need to be delivered exactly once
>
> Is there any existing work out there on this? Or should I maybe be
> looking at prototyping something?

The skype tools have some sort of decent-looking publish/subscribe
thing, PgQ, then they layer their replication on top of. It's multi
consumer and producer, with "delivered at least once" semantics.

Looks nice.

Cheers,
Steve

In response to

  • PG-MQ? at 2007-06-19 21:45:16 from Chris Browne

Responses

  • Re: PG-MQ? at 2007-06-20 03:01:39 from Chris Browne

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chris Browne 2007-06-20 03:01:39 Re: PG-MQ?
Previous Message Chris Browne 2007-06-19 21:45:16 PG-MQ?