difference between rabbitmq and kafka

Objective Open source community has a lot of excellent queue middleware, such as RABBITMQ and Kafka, each queue seems to have its characteristics, in the project selection, often dazzled, overwhelmed. For RABBITMQ and Kafka, which one should I choose?RABBITMQ Architecture

, message sequencing, problem tracking, visual management tools, plug-in systems, communityRABBITMQ Best, Activemq second, zeromq worst.Of course zeromq can also do, but they have to manually write code implementation, the amount of code is not small. Especially in reliability: persistence, delivery Confirmation, publisher verification, and high availability .So in reliability and availability, RABBITMQ is the first choice, although Activemq also has,

I. Overview of Message QueuingMessage Queuing middleware is an important component in distributed system, which mainly solves the problems of application decoupling, asynchronous message, traffic cutting and so on, realizing high performance, high availability, scalable and final consistency architecture. More message queues are currently available with ACTIVEMQ,RABBITMQ,ZEROMQ,KAFKA,METAMQ,ROCKETMQ Second,

Reprinted from the message middleware Activemq, RABBITMQ, ROCKETMQ, ZeroMQ, Kafka how to choose. Recently to the company's Message Queuing middleware selection, the market related to open source technology is very much, such as ACTIVEMQ, RABBITMQ, ZeroMQ, Kafka, as well as Alibaba's rocketmq and so on. So much techno

RabbitMQ and Kafka A simple comparison from several angles mq (Rabbitmq,kafka) Span style= "BACKGROUND-COLOR:INHERIT;; Font-family: "The song Body" is elaborated and made a simple comparison, 1" Application scenario rabbitmq, follow AMQP agreement, by the intrinsic

Introduction In distributed system, we widely use message middleware to exchange data between systems, and facilitate asynchronous decoupling. Now open source message middleware has a lot of time ago our own product ROCKETMQ (Metaq core) also smooth open source, get everyone's attention. So, what is the performance of message middleware? With this in doubt, our middleware test group performs a performance comparison of the common three types of message products (

Objective: Activemq and RabbitMq and Kafka in the previous projects have been used in succession, of course, for the three did not have a specific comparison, the following excerpt some online about these three comparisons, I have seen after I feel It is possible to have a clearer feedback of these three specific cases that have been used in the scene, with the following specific comparisons: 1) TPS Compari

= Org.apache.flume.interceptor.timestampinterceptor$builderTier1.sources.source1.interceptors.i1.preserveExisting = TrueTier1.channels.channel1.type = MemoryTier1.sinks.sink1.channel = Channel1Tier1.sinks.sink1.type = Org.apache.flume.sink.kafka.KafkaSinkTier1.sinks.sink1.topic = Flume_outTier1.sinks.sink1.brokerList = 127.0.0.1,127.0.0.1:9093,27.0.0.1:9094Tier1.sinks.sink1.requiredAcks = 1Tier1.sinks.sink11.batchSize = 20Configure the update configuration to complete the restart agentThis is t

I have studied RABBITMQ before and have installed it. the articles for the installation record are as follows:Erlang:http://www.cnblogs.com/charlesblc/p/5512380.htmlRabbitmq:http://www.cnblogs.com/charlesblc/p/5516585.htmlAs you can see, good memory is inferior to bad writing. Still have to record!In addition, the classification is particularly important, with the title search RABBITMQ is not found at all,

1. Why do we need MQ?(1) Peak and fill ValleyTake the order system and settlement system scenario, if the order system calls the billing system through the RPC framework,The amount of orders generated in the event of a peak sale can be very large, and because the order is generated very quickly,This will inevitably cause system pressure to the settlement system, the server utilization will be high, but in the peak point of time the order volume is smaller,The server utilization of the clearing s

Today's meeting to discuss why log processing uses both Flume and Kafka, is it possible to use only Kafka without Flume? The idea was to use only the Flume interface, whether it is the input interface (socket and file) and the output interface (kafka/hdfs/hbase, etc.).Consider a single scenario, and from a simplified system perspective, it might be better to use

First of all, Flume and Kafka are message systems , but they also have a lot of different places, flume more toward the message acquisition system, and Kafka more toward the message cache system. The difference in "one" designFlume is a message acquisition system, which mainly solves the problem is the multiple collection of messages. As a result, Flume provides

RABBITMQ and Gearman are all doing Message Queuing, then what is the difference between the two, or the advantages and disadvantages of the comparison between each? Reply content:Gearman is a distributed task distribution system that focuses on job RABBITMQ is a distributed message queue, weighing on message/data Gearman to implement the message's priority, ord