Kafka is dead, long live Kafka

> The first is that because of the nature of message queues, they're either empty or full.

... Wat?

> that is it's a true "fire and forget" kind of request and direct response time is not a concern, then what does the queue gain you over simply posting it to a database table?

Performance is why. The fire and forget aspect is like udp in the sense that you don't need to ensure ordering of messages (packets) or hard persistence to the database. Also, dead letter queues exist for a reason.

Message queues are super useful. The highest performance systems I've seen use the message queue + pool of workers paradigm, as it allows you to better smooth your load (unlike immediate republishing like in sns, which requires hardware available to accept) with minimal guarantees (unlike a write ahead log such as kinesis). The buffer is also great because it allows you a bit more time to scale up both your message queue fleet and worker fleet when you get a load spike.

We've done lots of customer research here and, combined with the experience my co-founder and I have, we can confidently say most Kafka users (especially high-throughput users) would happily make a trade off of increased end-to-end latency in exchange for a massive cost reduction and the operational simplicity provided by WarpStream.

* Apache Kafka is undoubtedly the leading product in the streaming platform space. It offers a simple yet effective API that has become the golden standard. All streaming/messaging vendors need to adhere to Kafka protocol.

* The original Kafka only used local storage to store data, which can be extremely expensive if the data volume is large. That's why many people are advocating for the development of Kafka Tiered Storage (KIP-405: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-405%3A...). To my best knowledge, there are at least five vendors selling Kafka or Kafka-compatible products with tiered storage support:

-- Confluent, which builds Kora, the 10X Kafka engine: https://www.confluent.io/10x-apache-kafka/;

-- Aiven, the open-source tiered storage Kafka (source code: https://github.com/Aiven-Open/tiered-storage-for-apache-kafk...);

-- Redpanda Data, which cuts your TCO by 6X (https://redpanda.com/platform-tco);

-- DataStax, which commercializes Apache Pulsar (https://pulsar.apache.org/);

-- StreamNative, which commercializes Apache Pulsar (https://pulsar.apache.org/).

* WarpStream claims to be "built directly on top of S3," which I believe is a very aggressive approach that has the potential to drastically reduce costs, even compared to tiered storage. The potential tradeoff is system performance, especially in terms of latency. As new technology, WarpStream brings novelty, and definitely it also needs to convince users that the service is robust and reliable.

* BYOC (Bring Your Own Cloud) is becoming the default option. Most of the vendors listed above offer BYOC, where data is stored in customers' cloud accounts, addressing concerns about data privacy and security.

I believe WarpStream is new technology to this market, and and would encourage the team to publish some detailed numbers to confirm its performance and efficiency!

Please sign up for our mailing list! We'll have some interesting things to announce related to this soon.