0

I need to know the actual difference between them. I just learned of these techs at the high level.

Ratul
  • 453
  • 7
  • 15

1 Answers1

2

No. AWS SWF is a workflow orchestration engine which has internal queueing support to deliver activity tasks. It is focused on coordinating execution of those tasks. SQS is a pure queue without any other additional features. My understanding is that RubbitMQ is more like SQS, just not as fault tolerant and scalable and Celery is just a Python client side library to consume from it. AWS SWF provides its own client side libraries to consume from its internal queues (called task lists)

Maxim Fateev
  • 6,458
  • 3
  • 20
  • 35
  • I'm running a laravel project that uses beanstalk queue, but we're struggling with that. I'm [considering](https://devops.stackexchange.com/a/3034/4997) switching to SWF. However I noticed that the amazon folks only made a wrapper library ([flow](https://aws.amazon.com/swf/details/flow/)) in ruby and java. To do things from scratch using php includes a lot of [ugliness and boilerplate code](https://stackoverflow.com/a/27382798/766570).. I'm considering running it using ruby simply to speed dev velocity.. do you agree with that approach? – abbood Jan 17 '18 at 10:48
  • It sounds reasonable. You might also consider using Cadence (https://github.com/uber/cadence, which is open source analog of SWF) and its Go client side library. – Maxim Fateev Jan 17 '18 at 16:24