CODEWITHSUNDEEP
web-servicesamazon-web-servicessynchronizationamazon-sqsamazon-sns
Dziamid
Dziamid

Reputation: 11609

Amazon sqs vs custom implementation

We need to sync data between different web servers. The idea is very basic: when one entity is created on one server, it should be sent to all the other servers. What's the right way to do it? We are currently evaluating 2 approaches: amazon's sqs and sns services and custom implementation with some key-value database (like memcached and memqueue). What are the common pitfalls of custom implementations? Any feedback will be highly appreciated.

Upvotes: 1

Views: 754

Answers (1)

Uriah Carpenter
Uriah Carpenter

Reputation: 6726

SQS would work OK if you create a new queue for each server and write the data to each queue. The biggest downside is that you will need each server to poll for new messages.

SNS would work more efficiently because it allows you to broadcast a message to multiple locations. However, it's a one-shot try; if a machine can't receive its notification when SNS sends it SNS will not try again.

You don't specify how many messages you are sending or what your performance requirements are, but any SQS/SNS system will likely be much, much slower (mostly due to latencies between sending the message and the servers receiving it) then a local memcache/key-value server solution.

A mixed solution would be to use a persistant store (like SimpleDB) and use SNS to alert the servers that new data is available.

Upvotes: 2

Related Questions