为什么我应该使用Amazon Kinesis而不是SNS-SQS? [英] Why should I use Amazon Kinesis and not SNS-SQS?
问题描述
我有一个用例，其中会有数据流传入，我无法以相同的速度使用它，因此需要一个缓冲区.可以使用SNS-SQS队列解决.我知道Kinesis解决了相同的目的，所以有什么区别?为什么我应该(或不应该)喜欢Kinesis?
I have a use case where there will be stream of data coming and I cannot consume it at the same pace and need a buffer. This can be solved using an SNS-SQS queue. I came to know the Kinesis solves the same purpose, so what is the difference? Why should I prefer (or should not prefer) Kinesis?
推荐答案
从表面上看，它们几乎是相似的，但是您的用例将确定哪种工具合适. IMO，如果您可以使用SQS，那么您应该-如果它可以满足您的要求，它将更简单，更便宜，但这是AWS FAQ中的更好解释，其中提供了两种工具的适当用例示例，帮助您做出决定:
On the surface they are vaguely similar, but your use case will determine which tool is appropriate. IMO, if you can get by with SQS then you should - if it will do what you want, it will be simpler and cheaper, but here is a better explanation from the AWS FAQ which gives examples of appropriate use-cases for both tools to help you decide:
这篇关于为什么我应该使用Amazon Kinesis而不是SNS-SQS?的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！
