Re:~2M msgs/second messaging system written in Go
by moe on Friday December 07, 2012 @11:00AM
(#4887466)
Thanks, that's much more informative!
I'm looking forward to the full suite being released so we can repeat the tests and see how it fares under real-world conditions with different message-sizes etc.
Sorry for the snark in my initial comment but I found this gist really lacking (akin to those press releases where $vendor brags about some arbitrary figure without providing any details).
I do like the simplicity of NATS and look forward to a fast server implementing it. However for something like a MQ where performance is the key-metric and highly dependent on the chosen workload one really shouldn't throw around numbers without backing them up thoroughly - that only hurts credibility.
Please take the write-ups by the RabbitMQ guys as a guide, who publish the source-code for all their benchmarks and go to great lengths explaining them:
I'm looking forward to the full suite being released so we can repeat the tests and see how it fares under real-world conditions with different message-sizes etc.
Sorry for the snark in my initial comment but I found this gist really lacking (akin to those press releases where $vendor brags about some arbitrary figure without providing any details).
I do like the simplicity of NATS and look forward to a fast server implementing it. However for something like a MQ where performance is the key-metric and highly dependent on the chosen workload one really shouldn't throw around numbers without backing them up thoroughly - that only hurts credibility.
Please take the write-ups by the RabbitMQ guys as a guide, who publish the source-code for all their benchmarks and go to great lengths explaining them:
http://www.rabbitmq.com/blog/2012/04/25/rabbitmq-performance...