当前位置: 动力学知识库 > 问答 > 编程问答 >

xmpp - Which Solution Handles Publisher/Subscriber Scenario Better?

问题描述:

The scenario is publisher/subscriber, and I am looking for a solution which can give the feasibility of sending one message generated by ONE producer across MULTIPLE consumers in real-time. the light weight this scenario can be handled by one solution, the better!

In case of AMQP servers I've only checked out Rabbitmq and using rabbitmq server for pub/sub pattern each consumer should declare an anonymous, private queue and bind it to an fanout exchange, so in case of thousand users consuming one message in real-time there will be thousands or so anonymous queue handling by rabbitmq.

But I really do not like the approach by the rabbitmq, It would be ideal if rabbitmq could handle this pub/sub scenario with one queue, one message , many consumers listening on one queue!

what I want to ask is which AMQP server or other type of solutions (anyone similar including XMPP servers or Apache Kafka or ...) handles the pub/sub pattern/scenario better and much more efficient than RabbitMQ with consuming (of course) less server resource?

preferences in order of interest:

  1. in case of AMQP enabled server handling the pub/sub scenario with only ONE or LESS number of queues (as explained)

  2. handling thousands of consumers in a light-weight manner, consuming less server resource comparing to other solutions in pub/sub pattern

  3. clustering, tolerating failing of nodes

  4. Many Language Bindings ( Python and Java at least)

  5. easy to use and administer

I know my question may be VERY general but I like to hear the ideas and suggestions for the pub/sub case.

thanks.

网友答案:

In general, for RabbitMQ, if you put the user in the routing key, you should be able to use a single exchange and then a small number of queues (even a single one if you wanted, but you could divide them up by server or similar if that makes sense given your setup).

If you don't need guaranteed order (as one would for, say, guaranteeing that FK constraints wouldn't get hit for a sequence of changes to various SQL database tables), then there's no reason you can't have a bunch of consumers drawing from a single queue.

If you want a broadcast-message type of scenario, then that could perhaps be handled a bit differently. Instead of the single user in the routing key, which you could use for non-broadcast-type messages, have a special user type, say, __broadcast__, that no user could actually have, and have the users to broadcast to stored in the payload of the message along with the message itself.

Your message processing code could then take care of depositing that message in the database (or whatever the end destination is) across all of those users.

Edit in response to comment from OP:

So the routing key might look something like this message.[user] where [user] could be the actual user if it were a point-to-point message, and a special __broadcast__ user (or similar user name that an actual user would not be allowed to register) which would indicate a broadcast style message.

You could then place the users to which the message should be delivered in the payload of the message, and then that message content (which would also be in the payload) could be delivered to each user. The mechanism for doing that would depend on what your end destination is. i.e. do the messages end up getting stored in Postgres, or Mongo DB or similar?

分享给朋友:
您可能感兴趣的文章:
随机阅读: