由网友(泛轻舟)分享简介：我们的启动目前正在使用的RabbitMQ （用的Python / Django的）的消息队列，现在我们正计划移至亚马逊SQS ，其高可用性和放大器;他们推迟队列功能。但我读网上到处是SQS是缓慢的表演和放大器;也非常符合成本效益，因此，它是明智的决定转移到亚马逊SQS还是应该坚持的RabbitMQ？如果我们的好坚持...

我们的启动目前正在使用的RabbitMQ （用的Python / Django的）的消息队列，现在我们正计划移至亚马逊SQS ，其高可用性和放大器;他们推迟队列功能。 但我读网上到处是SQS是缓慢的表演和放大器;也非常符合成本效益，因此，它是明智的决定转移到亚马逊SQS还是应该坚持的RabbitMQ？ 如果我们的好坚持与RabbitMQ的，什么为延迟队列的替代解决方案？

Our startup is currently using RabbitMQ (with Python/Django) for messaging queues, now we are planning to move to Amazon SQS for its high availability & their delayed queue feature. But I am reading on INTERNET everywhere that SQS is slow performing & also very cost effective, so is it wise decision to move to Amazon SQS or should to stick to RabbitMQ? And if we its good to stick with RabbitMQ, whats the alternative solution for "delayed queues"?

推荐答案

我还没有与低性能的SQS任何问题，但随后又也许这将是我的应用程序不要指望子的性质毫秒级的响应时间在我的队列中的项目。对我来说，在队列中完成对项目的工作贡献更大的滞后性比需要使用队列的时间。

I haven't had any problems with slow performance on SQS, but then again it maybe that the be the nature of my apps don't count on sub-millisecond response times for items in my queue. For me the work done on the items in the queue contributes more to the lag than the time it takes to use the queue.

有关我SQS的分布，高度可用和'放手'自然适合该法案。只有你能决定什么更重要的是：在你需要养活自己，或者队列作为服务AWS的产品非冗余系统的性能几个毫秒。不知道你的应用程序，我不能说，如果感觉到额外的性能是一个必要的权衡你。

For me the distributed, highly available and 'hands-off' nature of SQS suits the bill. Only you can decide whats is more important: a few more milliseconds of performance in a non-redundant system that you need to support yourself, or the 'queue as a service' offerings of AWS. Not knowing you application, I can't say if the perceived extra performance is a necessary trade off for you.