No support for queues about que HOT 7 CLOSED

(also, I run several different rails applications off the same database, and each of the applications needs to be able to run jobs)

from que.

for what it's worth, this is the only missing feature that prevents me from using que on tanga.com and friends.

from que.

I've been thinking about named queues for a while, since they're such a
popular feature on other systems. One of the things I wanted to achieve by
moving the worker pool into the web process is removing the need to scale
worker and web processes independently, since the same process can do
either job as needed, but named queues push you into having sets of workers
specific to each queue, which kind of defeats the purpose. But at the same
time, it makes sense to me that one might need several distinct codebases
reading from the same queue.

Also, I don't really relish the notion of tasking another column onto the
front of the que_jobs index, since it already feels too big to me, but I
should test the actual performance of it before judging.

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 10:46 AM, Joe Van Dyk [email protected]:

for what it's worth, this is the only missing feature that prevents me
from using que on tanga.com and friends.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/7#issuecomment-32293932
.

from que.

having jobs run inside the web process should still work, the web process would just process the jobs that are on the queues that it's watching.

from que.

Yeah, that'll still work. It's just that the concept goes against the
massive paradigm shift in the Ruby application landscape I was kind of
hoping for :) But I agree it's an important use case.

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Joe Van Dyk [email protected]:

having jobs run inside the web process should still work, the web process
would just process the jobs that are on the queues that it's watching.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/7#issuecomment-32304006
.

from que.

I want to tackle some easier things (ActiveRecord worker wakeups, custom
retry logic) and release 0.5.0 first, though.

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 12:50 PM, Chris Hanks <[email protected]

wrote:

Yeah, that'll still work. It's just that the concept goes against the
massive paradigm shift in the Ruby application landscape I was kind of
hoping for :) But I agree it's an important use case.

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Joe Van Dyk [email protected]:

having jobs run inside the web process should still work, the web process
would just process the jobs that are on the queues that it's watching.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/7#issuecomment-32304006
.

from que.

09fd321

from que.