NATS vs HTTP for Interservice Communication
2 likes5,189 views
The document discusses the differences between traditional HTTP architecture and NATS microservice architecture, highlighting the drawbacks of HTTP such as the need for dedicated web servers and issues with load balancing and service discovery. It emphasizes how NATS is lightweight, flexible, and performant, making it more suitable for microservices. The document also outlines benchmark setup and results, considering various NATS strategies and factors affecting performance.
Related topics:1 of 9
Downloaded 24 times
More Related Content
What's hot (20)
Ad
Similar to NATS vs HTTP for Interservice Communication (20)
Ad
More from NATS (20)
NATS vs HTTP for Interservice Communication
- 1. NATS vs HTTP Inter service communication
- 2. Agenda ● Traditional HTTP Architecture ● NATS Microservice Architecture ● Benchmark setup ● Benchmark results ● Migration Considerations
- 3. Traditional HTTP Architecture ● Drawbacks: ○ Load Balancing ○ Service Discovery ○ Each service must have a dedicated WebServer ● Doesn't fit the microservice model
- 4. NATS Microservice Architecture ● Fits the new Microservice patterns ● NATS is ○ Lightweight ○ Flexible ○ Highly Performant ● It becomes easier to create microservices ○ Load Balancing ○ Service Discovery
- 5. Benchmark setup ● Running with Docker ● One Client ● One Proxy ● One Service ● Source code ○ https://github.com/diogogmt/nats-rest-benchmark
- 6. Benchmark Results ● Each request is executed serially ● Client times how long it takes to execute all requests
- 7. Benchmark Results ● Client executes requests concurrently with a factor of 20%
- 8. Considerations ● Different NATS strategies ○ Pub/Sub ○ Request/Reply ○ Queuing ● Keep in mind ○ Concurrency ○ Session Management ○ Metadata ○ Message status ○ NATS-Proxy framework ■ Author: Radomír Sohlich ■ https://github.com/sohlich/nats-proxy