Hacker News Reader

How do you look at models like temporal.io (service in front of DB) and go-workflows (direct to DB) in comparison? It seems like this is more a step back towards that traditional queue like asynq is, which is where the industry is leaving from to the model of temporal

View on HN

Personally I've found Temporal very limited as a queue: no FIFO ordering (!), no priorities, no routing, etc. It's also very complex when you just want async jobs, and more specialized than a DB or message broker, which can be used for many other things. I think there's a place for both.

I don't think these approaches are necessarily mutually exclusive. There are some great things that can be layered on top of the foundation we've built, including workflows. The best part about doing this is that you can maintain full transactionality within a single primary data store and not introduce another 3rd party or external service into your availability equation.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com