NATS VS nanomsg

[1] https://github.com/nats-io/nats-server/issues/6832#issuecomm...

https://nats.io is easier to use than Kafka and already solves several of the points in this post I believe, like removing partitions, supporting key-based streams, and having flexible topic hierarchies.

Look at the contribution history, basically all active contributors work for Synadia: https://github.com/nats-io/nats-server/graphs/contributors

That's not a healthy / functioning open source community. Less than 30 people have made more than 10 commits; most of the 160 were "drive by" who fixed a single small thing.

NATS, with its lightweight and high-performance design, offers features well-suited for sandbox testing. We can leverage NATS queue groups, which function similarly to Kafka consumer groups.

In today’s dynamic cloud environments, managing Kubernetes resources across multiple clusters can be a complex task. Traditional methods often lack the agility and event-driven architecture needed to respond quickly to changes and automate resource provisioning. This article explores how Sveltos, in conjunction with NATS and JetStream, simplifies multi-cluster Kubernetes management through event-driven automation, streamlining operations and improving responsiveness.

hey thanks!

definitely interesting!

I do wonder if this really solves the author problem because by the looks of it , you just have to run meta command and it would run over each of the sub directory. While at the same time , I think I like it because this is what I think people refer to as "modular monolith"

Combining this with nats https://nats.io/ (hey if you don't want it to be over the network , you could use nats with the memory model of your application itself to reduce any overhead) and essentially just get yourself a really modular monolith in which you can then seperate things selectively (ahem , microservices) afterwards rather easily.

and now decided to write more complex things using https://nats.io and https://data-star.dev -

I've had a look at some open source libraries that already support networking on different platforms like nanomsg, but I can't really tell how the library includes it's headers. My current idea is to use the processors to include the right headers for each system, and then each function would do the same. In a makefile I would do the same for linking correctly. Is this a good method, or is there an easier way? Or does it not matter overall as long as the library works?