Correct, but we solved this a long time ago when we started sending files to servers to be converted, for example. We either got a 'job_id' or a call to a webhook when the job was finished."
This post doesn’t seem to understand how these systems work at the core of agent harnesses.
I would suggest that there is a much, much older technology than pub/sub that can be used for such kind of data transfer: it's UDP, documented in 1980.
I can't stop thinking how overcomplicated our software engineering reality is so we need to reinvent layers and layers of stuff on top of the other stuff. We must make applications for browsers; browsers disallow basic network communication for the code they execute; so sending a chunk of data from a client to a server becomes a real adventure.
This theme keeps popping up everywhere. Lots of things were "the way we did things" because a lot of reasons. LLMs just amplify some things and they get enhanced visibility. It can be a good thing, if you're able to understand what/why/how changed, or it can be a bad thing if you insist that "this is how we do things, because this is how we've always done things".
Or... maybe... just maybe... it can be a bad thing, because it's a bad thing.
The "cloud native" (as the author refers to it) idea that app servers should be stateless is actually the new idea.
The industry eventually reached consensus on sticky sessions being a bad idea a lot of the time. That's why stateless app servers became the norm.
