We are actively looking at how we can better handle use cases like Dask handles. A couple folks we are working with use Dask heavily and are looking to switch. They are far more expert in Dask than we are so I don't want to shoot my mouth of. The issues they've general discussed with us are around performance and scaling problems they have had. We are still actively learning from them and hope to have a first version to start addressing those use cases around the end of this year. Ideally middle of Decemeber.

Dask is very "batch" oriented, which as I said above, is something we are in the process of adding to Wallaroo. Wallaroo is very stream processing oriented. Wallaroo's strength are working with stateful, event-by-event applications.

If you were to take word count as an example. Dask would be great if you had a body of text in files or whatnot that you needed to count. There's a beginning and end to that task. Count the words in this text. Wallaroo would shine if you had a stream of never ending text, like twitter's trending topics.

That's a very coarse outline of a couple of differences. While we are working with clients to help them move off of Dask by adding that functionality to Dask, I also think that if you wanted to, you could use Wallaroo along side a more batch oriented system like Dask. Stream processing and batch processing are complementary. A number of technologies (us included) are looking to unify them. Why? Well, there's a lot of operational overhead to running a batch system and a streaming system. A lot of folks would like to run a single system that works well for both.

I hope that answers your question.