Sorry not John, Mike :)...
PS: not getting enough sleep! :)
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Mahadev Konar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is exactly what Hedwig does.
> John as Neha mentioned,
> You might want to look at Kafka/Hedwig/ActiveMQ.
> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Ted Dunning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> ZK definitely provides the raw material for something like SQS.
>> Generally, however, a queue *in* ZK isn't quite as good an idea as a queue
>> that is *coordinated* by ZK, mostly for performance reasons. Thus Pat's
>> suggestion to look at Bookkeeper is not a bad one at all. A direct clone
>> of SQS that pushes state to ZK for fail-over purposes would be very easy to
>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Mike Schilli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Seems like it should be possible to implement a queue service like
>>> Amazon's SQS  with ZooKeeper, with queue items becoming 'invisible'
>>> once a client picks them, but pop back into the queue after a timeout
>>> unless the client doesn't explicitly delete them.
>>> Anyone done that?
>>> -- Mike
>>> Mike Schilli
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>  http://aws.amazon.com/sqs