Hacker Neue

Preferences
KraftyOne parent
The main difference is that this is a library you can install and use in any application anywhere, while Durable Functions is (as I understand it) primarily for orchestrating serverless functions in Azure.
rfonseca
(disclaimer: I work at Microsoft, but am not directly involved with Durable Functions)

Being a library is a pretty interesting feature! Correct, Durable Functions allows you to write task-parallel orchestrations of task-parallel 'activities' (which are stateless functions), and these orchestrations are fully persistent and resilient, like DBOS executions. It also has the concept of 'Entities', which are named objects (of a type you define) that "live forever", and serialize all method invocations, which are the only way to change their private state. These are also persistent. The Netherite paper [1], section 2, describes this model well.

So, there seems to be a pretty close correspondence between DBOS steps and DF activities, and between workflows and orchestrations. I don't know what the correspondence is to DF entities is in the DBOS model.

[1] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/wp-content/uploads/...

KraftyOne OP
Yes, agree the correspondence is close, the primary difference is in form factor and not in underlying guarantees (but form factor matters! Building this as a library was technically tricky, but unlocks a lot of use cases). Reading the Orleans and early durable functions papers in grad school (and many of your papers) was definitely helpful in our journey.

This item has no comments currently.