← Back to Kontasks
Queue + Kontasks Complexity Analysis
Analyzing how message queue interacts with kontask architecture
Output
🤔 You're Right - It Gets Messy
The Mess
With kontasks, each request creates its own output kontask. If you queue messages:
- Request A running → creates kontask A (in progress)
- You queue "then run tests" → stored in browser
- Kontask A completes → card renders
- Auto-send queued message → starts Request B
- Request B creates kontask B
Problem: Now you have TWO separate kontask cards, not a continuous conversation. The "flow" breaks.
The Deeper Issue
Kontasks are designed as discrete work units with clear boundaries. A queue implies continuous conversation flow. These models conflict:
| Kontask Model | Queue Model |
|---|---|
| One request = one kontask | Many messages = one session |
| Each has its own output card | Output flows continuously |
| Clear start/end per task | Blurred boundaries |
| Recovery per-kontask | Recovery... where? |
Maybe Keep It Simple?
The current model has benefits:
- Clear boundaries - Each request is a kontask, easy to track
- Recovery works - One requestId = one kontask to recover
- History makes sense - Kontask list shows discrete tasks
- Forcing function - Makes you think in complete requests
Alternative: Faster Turnaround
Instead of queuing, maybe the real fix is making individual requests faster to submit? Keep input enabled so you can draft your next message, but still submit as separate kontasks. You're just typing ahead, not queueing.
Quick Actions
Original Request
No layout configured
Details
Type
General
Status
Completed
Scope
vibetools
Tags
consolearchitecturekontasks
Created
2 Jan 2026, 6:48 pm
Updated
2 Jan 2026, 6:48 pm
Created By
claude
Raw Data
{
"id": "850c0b86-d3b2-46ef-80e1-cc8680d378c6",
"type": "general",
"status": "completed",
"title": "Queue + Kontasks Complexity Analysis",
"description": "Analyzing how message queue interacts with kontask architecture",
"context": {
"output": "<div style=\"background:#1e1e1e;color:#e0e0e0;padding:20px;border-radius:8px;font-family:sans-serif;\"><h2 style=\"color:#fff;margin:0 0 16px 0;\">🤔 You're Right - It Gets Messy</h2><div style=\"background:#2d2d2d;padding:16px;border-radius:6px;margin-bottom:16px;\"><h3 style=\"color:#f44336;margin:0 0 12px 0;\">The Mess</h3><p style=\"color:#e0e0e0;margin:0 0 12px 0;\">With kontasks, each request creates its own output kontask. If you queue messages:</p><ol style=\"color:#e0e0e0;margin:0;padding-left:20px;line-height:1.8;\"><li>Request A running → creates kontask A (in progress)</li><li>You queue \"then run tests\" → stored in browser</li><li>Kontask A completes → card renders</li><li>Auto-send queued message → starts Request B</li><li>Request B creates kontask B</li></ol><p style=\"color:#e5c07b;margin:12px 0 0 0;\"><strong>Problem:</strong> Now you have TWO separate kontask cards, not a continuous conversation. The \"flow\" breaks.</p></div><div style=\"background:#2d2d2d;padding:16px;border-radius:6px;margin-bottom:16px;\"><h3 style=\"color:#61afef;margin:0 0 12px 0;\">The Deeper Issue</h3><p style=\"color:#e0e0e0;margin:0;\">Kontasks are designed as <strong>discrete work units</strong> with clear boundaries. A queue implies <strong>continuous conversation flow</strong>. These models conflict:</p><table style=\"width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;margin-top:12px;\"><tr style=\"background:#1e1e1e;\"><th style=\"padding:10px;text-align:left;color:#c678dd;\">Kontask Model</th><th style=\"padding:10px;text-align:left;color:#98c379;\">Queue Model</th></tr><tr><td style=\"padding:10px;border-top:1px solid #444;\">One request = one kontask</td><td style=\"padding:10px;border-top:1px solid #444;\">Many messages = one session</td></tr><tr><td style=\"padding:10px;border-top:1px solid #444;\">Each has its own output card</td><td style=\"padding:10px;border-top:1px solid #444;\">Output flows continuously</td></tr><tr><td style=\"padding:10px;border-top:1px solid #444;\">Clear start/end per task</td><td style=\"padding:10px;border-top:1px solid #444;\">Blurred boundaries</td></tr><tr><td style=\"padding:10px;border-top:1px solid #444;\">Recovery per-kontask</td><td style=\"padding:10px;border-top:1px solid #444;\">Recovery... where?</td></tr></table></div><div style=\"background:#2d2d2d;padding:16px;border-radius:6px;margin-bottom:16px;\"><h3 style=\"color:#98c379;margin:0 0 12px 0;\">Maybe Keep It Simple?</h3><p style=\"color:#e0e0e0;margin:0;\">The current model has benefits:</p><ul style=\"color:#e0e0e0;margin:8px 0;padding-left:20px;line-height:1.8;\"><li><strong>Clear boundaries</strong> - Each request is a kontask, easy to track</li><li><strong>Recovery works</strong> - One requestId = one kontask to recover</li><li><strong>History makes sense</strong> - Kontask list shows discrete tasks</li><li><strong>Forcing function</strong> - Makes you think in complete requests</li></ul></div><div style=\"background:#2d2d2d;padding:16px;border-radius:6px;\"><h4 style=\"margin:0 0 8px 0;color:#fff;\">Alternative: Faster Turnaround</h4><p style=\"color:#9ca3af;margin:0;\">Instead of queuing, maybe the real fix is making individual requests faster to submit? Keep input enabled so you can <em>draft</em> your next message, but still submit as separate kontasks. You're just typing ahead, not queueing.</p></div></div>",
"requestedAt": "2026-01-02T08:55:00Z",
"requestId": "dc059705-61b8-49ea-90da-cdc7015770e3",
"choices": [
{
"label": "Keep it simple (draft only)",
"value": "draft-only",
"primary": true
},
{
"label": "Try queue anyway",
"value": "try-queue"
},
{
"label": "Rethink kontask model",
"value": "rethink-model"
}
]
},
"createdBy": "claude",
"createdAt": "2026-01-02T08:48:09.716Z",
"updatedAt": "2026-01-02T08:48:09.868Z",
"requestId": "dc059705-61b8-49ea-90da-cdc7015770e3",
"scope": "vibetools",
"tags": [
"console",
"architecture",
"kontasks"
],
"targetUser": "claude"
}