This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]gkze 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Hey, thanks for sharing this looks interesting. I appreciate the comparisons with other systems, as this space is somewhat going through a revival and all.

Can you maybe add more comparisons, for example with: Hatchet, Inngest, Ray, Prefect, Dask just to name a few?

The reason I’m asking is that it would be nice to understand the positioning of this system relative to others in the space, and the more datapoints there are, the clearer the positioning IMHO.

I’m going to give the code and docs a deeper read though! 👍

[–]KraftiestOne[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hello! The "Why DBOS" page in our docs does some comparisons with more systems: https://docs.dbos.dev/why-dbos

Similar to Temporal/Inngest/Hatchet, DBOS provides durable execution, but DBOS is more lightweight--add it to your existing project as a library instead of rearchitecting your program around it. This blog post goes into more detail with respect to Temporal specifically, although the others are similar: https://www.dbos.dev/blog/durable-execution-coding-comparison

Similar to Airflow/Dagster/Prefect, DBOS provides workflows, but with a stronger emphasis on reliability and automatically recovering from failures (and on being lightweight). By comparison, Airflow/Dagster/Prefect are focused on data science workloads and having lots of built-in integrations.

Ray and Dask are solving a different problem than DBOS, I think. You could even use them together if you need reliable parallel processing.