|
|
|
|
|
by _frkl
2362 days ago
|
|
This sounds interesting, what exactly do you mean by 'endpoint' in this scenario? I looked into a few alternatives before settling for pulsar, and disregarded nats because it didn't seem to support message persistence. I didn't look into it too deeply though, maybe i should have. How do you guarantee no message is lost with NATS? |
|
The core of it is this point:
"Functions placed at low levels of a system may be redundant or of little value when compared with the cost of providing them at that low level."
That is, in order get that message redundancy or exactly once delivery, or message persistence, you pay a high cost, and you may be better off delegating to the endpoints.
This blog provides a good overview
https://blog.acolyer.org/2014/11/14/end-to-end-arguments-in-...
Here is the original paper
http://web.mit.edu/Saltzer/www/publications/endtoend/endtoen...