Pulsar vs. Kafka
streamnative.io
Pulsar vs. Kafka
1–10 of 103 posts
Re: Pulsar vs. Kafka
#2Can anyone share their thoughts on whether, in case of a new project is it worth to start with Pulsar instead of Kafka as a distributed log/pub sub solution with guaranteed delivery? I heard a lot of stories about Kafka's operational complexity and TFA seems to be pointing out that Pulsar has a lower operational upkeep (ie. less manpower needed to keep it running).
Re: Pulsar vs. Kafka
#3All those articles of kafka vs pulsar are always biased (this one is from a company selling pulsar). There are so many of them that I can't get an opinion on which one is good for what.
Re: Pulsar vs. Kafka
#4Can anyone share their thoughts on whether, in case of a new project is it worth to start with Pulsar instead of Kafka as a distributed log/pub sub solution with guaranteed delivery? I heard a lot of stories about Kafka's operational complexity and TFA seems to be pointing out that Pulsar has a lower operational upkeep (ie. less manpower needed to keep it running).
If you are worried about operational complexity and don't know enough to get a clear set of requirement and tradeoffs beforehand, just start off with a single rabbitmq node. By the time you outgrow it, you'll have hired someone who'll be able to make the call for you.
Re: Pulsar vs. Kafka
#5Wow thanks for the pulsar AD.
Personally, i feel this writing is incredibly biased.
And the proposed architecture seems like something from the dark ages.
Re: Pulsar vs. Kafka
#6I really like the architecture of Pulsar, it is very elegant with clear separation of duties between components.
That said, we have used Kafka for so long, and it works well enough at our scale that we have no reason to even test Pulsar. Kafka also has much more integrations with other tools due to its popularity.
Re: Pulsar vs. Kafka
#7Can anyone share their thoughts on whether, in case of a new project is it worth to start with Pulsar instead of Kafka as a distributed log/pub sub solution with guaranteed delivery? I heard a lot of stories about Kafka's operational complexity and TFA seems to be pointing out that Pulsar has a lower operational upkeep (ie. less manpower needed to keep it running).
Because Pulsar and Kafka both use Zookeeper, the operational complexity will largely be the same. The best thing you can do to lower op complexity is using managed Kafka by Confluent or AWS (something similar probably exists for pulsar).
Re: Pulsar vs. Kafka
#8Can anyone share their thoughts on whether, in case of a new project is it worth to start with Pulsar instead of Kafka as a distributed log/pub sub solution with guaranteed delivery? I heard a lot of stories about Kafka's operational complexity and TFA seems to be pointing out that Pulsar has a lower operational upkeep (ie. less manpower needed to keep it running).
The claims in the article about lower operational upkeep are pretty disingenuous. They only talk about things that are easier in pulsar than kafka, but not about the complete picture at all. I'd largely ignore the article and go have a look at how to run both independently. As another commenter posted, they both require zookeeper to run (there are efforts to remove ZK from kafka, but until that's proven you'll still need to assume you need ZK), so the operational upkeep it going to be very similar.
Re: Pulsar vs. Kafka
#9Can anyone share their thoughts on whether, in case of a new project is it worth to start with Pulsar instead of Kafka as a distributed log/pub sub solution with guaranteed delivery? I heard a lot of stories about Kafka's operational complexity and TFA seems to be pointing out that Pulsar has a lower operational upkeep (ie. less manpower needed to keep it running).
Because Pulsar and Kafka both use Zookeeper, the operational complexity will largely be the same. The best thing you can do to lower op complexity is using managed Kafka by Confluent or AWS (something similar probably exists for pulsar).
Yeah was just gonna suggest either any one of AWS's queue services (SQS / Kinesis or MSK), or GCP (Cloud Pub/Sub / Managed Kafka). A quick search yields Azure Queue Storage(?) as a potential hosted option
Re: Pulsar vs. Kafka
#10> two of the most favored messaging systems on the market
Give me a break, I'd literally never even heard of Pulsar until this article popped up.
Of all messaging systems I would have thought Kafka vs SQS, or even RabbitMQ at the very least