nats-server

I think jetstream storage is about to get s3 api support https://github.com/nats-io/nats-server/discussions/5486 . also you can use bento connector to connect it to any pipeline you could possibly want. It is easy to manage and works great

> Nominate NATS for the Silent Failure Peace Prize? One or two of the comments on GitHub by the NATS team in response to Issues opened by Kyle are also more than a bit cringeworthy. Such as this one: "Most of our production setups, and in fact Synadia Cloud as well is that each replica is in a separate AZ. These have separate power, networking etc. So the possibility of a loss here is extremely low in terms of due to power outages." Which Kyle had to call them out on: "Ah, I have some bad news here--placing nodes in separate AZs does not mean that NATS' strategy of not syncing things to disk is safe. See #7567 for an example of a single node failure causing data loss (and split-brain!)." https://github.com/nats-io/nats-server/issues/7564#issuecomm...

A tiny bit more context here: https://github.com/nats-io/nats-server/discussions/3312#disc... (I opened this discussion 2.5 years ago and get an email from github every once in a while ever since. I had given up hope TBH)

> Jetstream clusters don't scale to many servers (they recommend max 3, I think) Jetstream is even more limited than most Kafkas on number of streams https://github.com/nats-io/nats-server/discussions/5128#disc...

Context: - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43829008 - https://github.com/cncf/toc/issues/1632 - https://github.com/nats-io/nats-server/issues/6832 I also built a lot on NATS Jetstream, and I'm questioning my decision in light of the threatened license change.

> NATS could never graduate Regarding the lack of graduation, I would invite people to read the full comment by user raghu999 on the nats-server discussion[1]. I will quote two paragraphs from it here, but I really encourage people to read the whole thing: During that lengthy graduation process, the CNCF TOC explicitly and repeatedly raised concerns about the lack of core server maintainer diversity and the risks of single-vendor (Synadia) dominance. Your [Synadia] team's responses at the time consistently deflected these concerns, arguing that client diversity was sufficient, the server was stable/uninteresting for external contributors, and that demanding core diversity was misguided. Now, the narrative has flipped entirely. The very fact that Synadia employees contributed the vast majority (~97%) of the server code – the exact

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.

See also the issue: https://github.com/nats-io/nats-server/issues/6832 Archived version: https://web.archive.org/web/20250425154144/https://github.co...

> 5.9k stars, 727 forks, 132 contributors: https://github.com/nats-io/nats.go That's the NATS Go _client_. The server project is https://github.com/nats-io/nats-server 17k stars, 1.5k forks, 160 contributors

JetStream was originally designed/built separately, but is now built into NATS. So that repo is obsolete. NATS with JetStream is here: https://github.com/nats-io/nats-server.

No. It doesn't. Sure, to get the most out of NATS you should run it as a server (which frankly isn't difficult as its a single Go binary). But you can embed it if you so wish. Indeed if you look at the NATS source code[1], that is exactly how NATS do their testing. They use an embedded NATS server in their test routines. [1]https://github.com/nats-io/nats-server/tree/main/test

Ahh, they may work on QUIC this year: https://github.com/nats-io/nats-server/issues/457

TIBCO Rednezvous, https://www.tibco.com/products/tibco-rendezvous, is the first thing that came to my mind from previous experience in the financial industry working with real-time market data. Although I'm not sure if it has built-in KV support for dealing with large payloads like NATS does, TIBCO RV and their related software packages are worth checking out to see what an long time established commercial product offers. Which leads me to... ... the protocol is text-based like HTTP with CR LF for field both for the client, https://docs.nats.io/reference/reference-protocols/nats-prot..., and cluster protocols, https://docs.nats.io/reference/reference-protocols/nats-serv... -- which means encoding overhead if your payloads are binary. So depending on your definition of performance, ymmv. I really do not see how implementing an API across

Re. #1, can you elaborate? The tracking issue for this is still open[1]. As far as I can tell this is a hard blocker for any use case where a random user on the web can connect to NATS, since it means that user can wiretap any room without knowing the room ID. Re #2, the problem is that a rollup of a subject in NATS rolls up the whole subject, so there’s a race condition if you try to use it the way DriftDB uses it. If one client is computing a compaction while another client sends a message, that message will be erased by the compaction. This works if a single producer is writing to a stream, because that producer can stop emitting messages during the compaction. But in our case, each client can produce messages at any time. DriftDB solves this by sending a sequence number alongside the rollup of the last message included in the rollup,