Having built my own queue-based data processing system and worked through a lot of pain in the past, I will say that I'm a huge fan of Inngest and what they are doing.
As for the article, I think the main point being driven here is:
"building a system with queues requires much more than just the queue itself"
I would imagine almost anyone who has built a production grade queue-based message processing system would agree.
For me, I would say that for the majority of software being developed, the investment to build all of that yourself just doesn't make sense. Obviously there will be exceptions, but Inngest gives you incredible power at a very simple layer of abstraction.
As for the article, I think the main point being driven here is:
"building a system with queues requires much more than just the queue itself"
I would imagine almost anyone who has built a production grade queue-based message processing system would agree.
For me, I would say that for the majority of software being developed, the investment to build all of that yourself just doesn't make sense. Obviously there will be exceptions, but Inngest gives you incredible power at a very simple layer of abstraction.