Building a Message Queue with Only Two Unix Signals
Posted2 months agoActive2 months ago
leandronsp.comTechstoryHigh profile
heatedmixed
Debate
80/100
Unix SignalsMessage QueueKafka
Key topics
Unix Signals
Message Queue
Kafka
The article explores building a message queue using only two UNIX signals, sparking a lively discussion about the feasibility and practicality of such an approach, as well as the author's clickbait title.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Very active discussionFirst comment
1h
Peak period
48
0-6h
Avg / period
13.3
Comment distribution53 data points
Loading chart...
Based on 53 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Oct 20, 2025 at 6:22 PM EDT
2 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Oct 20, 2025 at 7:23 PM EDT
1h after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
48 comments in 0-6h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Oct 23, 2025 at 12:09 PM EDT
2 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 45650178Type: storyLast synced: 11/20/2025, 1:42:01 PM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
Signals are generally the slowest IPC method, unless you're doing something stupid with a different method.
A named pipe (like Postfix sendmail uses) seems slightly more sane.
https://ldpreload.com/blog/signalfd-is-useless
https://davmac.org/davpage/linux/rtsignals.html
Corporate tried to push us to replace it with SQS and it could not keep up / costs with through the roof
"Yes, we built a message broker using nothing but UNIX signals and a bit of Ruby magic. Sure, it’s not production-ready, and you definitely shouldn’t use this in your next startup (please don’t), but that was never the point.
"The real takeaway here isn’t the broker itself: it’s understanding how the fundamentals work. We explored binary operations, UNIX signals, and IPC in a hands-on way that most people never bother with.
"We took something “useless” and made it work, just for fun. So next time someone asks you about message brokers, you can casually mention that you once built (or saw) one using just two signals. And if they look at you weird, well, that’s their problem. Now go build something equally useless and amazing. The world needs more hackers who experiment just for the fun of it."
For me ragebait and rudeness are things like: "X sucks, use Y", "If you aren't doing W you're losing money", etc.
He never said that Kafka sucks, nor anything related, obviously you can't replace kafka with only two signals. I'm asking with all politeness as possible, I just wanna understand what other people consider improper behavior
I kind of hate this trend of making clickbait and then apologizing for it. I think its more annoying then just making clickbait.
Is it really that hard to just accurately title your blog posts?
You nailed it!
If you choose to take this experiment further and go deeper, you will discover something even more fun: reentrancy.
... That, and how software interrupts work at the kernel level. Happy hunting!
EDIT: In anticipation of an eventual response, I just realized how condescending this sounds at first glance. I meant it in good faith.
[1]: https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man3/sigqueue.3.html
The article is fine, but call it what it is: abusing the Unix signal system for shit and giggles. Nothing wrong with that.