[Koha-bugs] [Bug 22417] Add a task queue

[bugzilla-daemon at bugs.koha-community.org]

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=22417

--- Comment #260 from Julian Maurice <julian.maurice at biblibre.com> ---
(In reply to Jonathan Druart from comment #259)
> (In reply to Julian Maurice from comment #258)
> > (In reply to Marcel de Rooy from comment #257)
> > > Actually not. As you say, we could run without MQ. But since we want a
> > > message queue anyway, this could be a nice first start.
> > That's a thing that is still not clear for me. For what other purpose do we
> > need a message queue ?
> 
> For now: all background jobs, and a task scheduler.
I'm curious about how we would implement a task scheduler with a message queue.
Would that be with something like
https://github.com/rabbitmq/rabbitmq-delayed-message-exchange ?

> But that can be extended to other things if we want (like indexing, sending
> emails, etc.).
Indexing and sending emails can be implemented as a background job too. How do
these tasks differ from a task like BatchUpdateBiblio ?

> With a configuration system we could add the capacity to define rules like
> "execute all the background jobs that does XXX", or "don't execute
> background jobs during opening hours". Also we could have several workers,
> each doing something specific, and have them running on a dedicated server.
The ability to have multiple workers is really great, but how will you run them
on another server ? You would need to have the whole Koha code duplicated on
this other server, right ?

> > > What I do not like, is writing two blocks: code with MQ en code without.
> > I do not like it either, but compared to forcing hundreds of users to
> > install a new dependency, it doesn't look too bad.
> 
> The idea was to not reinvent the wheel and use one solution that
> demonstrated its effectiveness. We could write our own server if we wish.
> In this implementation (there have been others previously) I decided to make
> things as simple as possible.
Do you mean our own message broker ? Because I certainly do not wish that. All
I'm suggesting is to make the dependency to RabbitMQ (or any other MQ)
optional, for small installations that won't benefit from it.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.