kestra VS Taskflow

Kestra's communication is asynchronous and based on a queuing mechanism. It leverages the Micronaut framework and offers two runners: one that uses a database (JDBC) for both the message queue and resource storage, and another that uses Kafka as the message queue and Elasticsearch as the resource storage. The platform is fully extensible and plugin-based, providing a rich set of plugins for various workflow tasks, triggers, and data storage options. For those interested, the GitHub repository is available here: https://github.com/kestra-io/kestra

For everyone wondering https://github.com/kestra-io/kestra/discussions/468

If you need any guidance with your Snowflake deployment, our experts at Kestra would love to hear from you. Let us know if you would like us to add more plugins to the list. Or start building your custom Kestra plugin today and send it our way. We always welcome contributions!

But I totally agree that a large static dag is not appropriate in the actual data world with data mesh and domain responsibility.

[0] https://github.com/kestra-io/kestra

- We have plans to add another option that will replace both dependencies with jdbc (https://github.com/kestra-io/kestra/pull/368), is theses dependencies more comfortable for you?

With Kestra's innate flexibility, and many integrations, you are not locked into the choice of one ingestion method or the other. Complex workflows can be developed, whether in parallel or sequentially, to deliver both ELT and ETL processes. Simple descriptive yaml is used to connect plugins, and to create flows. Because workflows created in Kestra are represented visually, and issues can be seen in relation to individual tasks, there is no need to fear complexity. Trouble can be traced to its source in an instant, allowing you to try new things and come up with a new solution without fear. Give it a try, and let us know what you come up with!

Kestra is an orchestration and scheduling platform that is designed to simplify the building, running, scheduling, and monitoring of complex data pipelines. Data pipelines can be built in real-time, no matter how complex the workflow, and can connect to multiple resources as needed (including Debezium).

For parallel programming nowadays, personally I reach for C++ Taskflow when I really care about performance, or a mix of core.async and running multiple load balanced instances when I’m doing more traditional web backend stuff in Clojure.

Also, you can take a look to good libraries. The problem is that very often libraries are heavily templated, so It could be hard. For example, I like the style of the Taskflow library, I think is very clear, is relatively small, while makes use of more advanced techniques: https://github.com/taskflow/taskflow

Cool. Thanks! How does it compare to taskflow?

I've not seen yet, but it's been a bit since I looked last, any evidence of being able to build a computation graph and "save" it to re-run on new inputs. Something like https://github.com/taskflow/taskflow

It seems you're describing something a generic parallel task framework. Check taskflow for a production ready example https://github.com/taskflow/taskflow/blob/master/

- https://github.com/taskflow/taskflow (I recommend to learn it first since its API and documentation are excellent)

If you want some sort of "job" system, where you submit items to a some sort of queue to be processed in parallel, try searching for a thread pool - there isn't one in the standard library, but there's about a million implementations online. There are more complicated versions of that idea, that describe computation as a directed acyclic graph, such as taskflow.

The tooling decisions affect engine design though. For example if you want to have visual representation of job graph as it happened in specific frame of interest you need to pass the information around about job relationships and output it to a tool of choice. For example see https://github.com/taskflow/taskflow

I am aware of DAGs of task based threading library like Taskflow and HPX however the benefit they have is not obvious to me, as the following sequential section depends on the parallel part being completed fully. If you want to suggest elaboration on the benefits of this approach would be welcome.