Kafka与RabbitMQ:两种行业参考发布/订阅实现的比较研究

P. Dobbelaere, K. S. Esmaili
{"title":"Kafka与RabbitMQ:两种行业参考发布/订阅实现的比较研究","authors":"P. Dobbelaere, K. S. Esmaili","doi":"10.1145/3093742.3093908","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Publish/subscribe is a distributed interaction paradigm well adapted to the deployment of scalable and loosely coupled systems. Apache Kafka and RabbitMQ are two popular open-source and commercially-supported pub/sub systems that have been around for almost a decade and have seen wide adoption. Given the popularity of these two systems and the fact that both are branded as pub/sub systems, two frequently asked questions in the relevant online forums are: how do they compare against each other and which one to use? In this paper, we frame the arguments in a holistic approach by establishing a common comparison framework based on the core functionalities of pub/sub systems. Using this framework, we then venture into a qualitative and quantitative (i.e. empirical) comparison of the common features of the two systems. Additionally, we also highlight the distinct features that each of these systems has. After enumerating a set of use cases that are best suited for RabbitMQ or Kafka, we try to guide the reader through a determination table to choose the best architecture given his/her particular set of requirements.","PeriodicalId":325666,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 11th ACM International Conference on Distributed and Event-based Systems","volume":"129 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"121","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Kafka versus RabbitMQ: A comparative study of two industry reference publish/subscribe implementations: Industry Paper\",\"authors\":\"P. Dobbelaere, K. S. Esmaili\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3093742.3093908\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Publish/subscribe is a distributed interaction paradigm well adapted to the deployment of scalable and loosely coupled systems. Apache Kafka and RabbitMQ are two popular open-source and commercially-supported pub/sub systems that have been around for almost a decade and have seen wide adoption. Given the popularity of these two systems and the fact that both are branded as pub/sub systems, two frequently asked questions in the relevant online forums are: how do they compare against each other and which one to use? In this paper, we frame the arguments in a holistic approach by establishing a common comparison framework based on the core functionalities of pub/sub systems. Using this framework, we then venture into a qualitative and quantitative (i.e. empirical) comparison of the common features of the two systems. Additionally, we also highlight the distinct features that each of these systems has. After enumerating a set of use cases that are best suited for RabbitMQ or Kafka, we try to guide the reader through a determination table to choose the best architecture given his/her particular set of requirements.\",\"PeriodicalId\":325666,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 11th ACM International Conference on Distributed and Event-based Systems\",\"volume\":\"129 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-06-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"121\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 11th ACM International Conference on Distributed and Event-based Systems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3093742.3093908\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 11th ACM International Conference on Distributed and Event-based Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3093742.3093908","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 121

摘要

发布/订阅是一种分布式交互范例,非常适合于可伸缩和松散耦合系统的部署。Apache Kafka和RabbitMQ是两个流行的开源和商业支持的发布/子系统,它们已经存在了近十年,并得到了广泛的采用。考虑到这两种系统的受欢迎程度以及它们都被称为pub/sub系统的事实,相关在线论坛中经常被问到的两个问题是:它们如何相互比较以及使用哪一个?在本文中,我们通过建立基于pub/sub系统核心功能的通用比较框架,以一种整体的方法来构建这些论点。使用这个框架,我们然后冒险进入两个系统的共同特征的定性和定量(即经验)比较。此外,我们还重点介绍了这些系统各自具有的独特特性。在列举了一组最适合RabbitMQ或Kafka的用例之后,我们试图引导读者通过一个决定表,根据他/她的特定需求选择最好的架构。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Kafka versus RabbitMQ: A comparative study of two industry reference publish/subscribe implementations: Industry Paper
Publish/subscribe is a distributed interaction paradigm well adapted to the deployment of scalable and loosely coupled systems. Apache Kafka and RabbitMQ are two popular open-source and commercially-supported pub/sub systems that have been around for almost a decade and have seen wide adoption. Given the popularity of these two systems and the fact that both are branded as pub/sub systems, two frequently asked questions in the relevant online forums are: how do they compare against each other and which one to use? In this paper, we frame the arguments in a holistic approach by establishing a common comparison framework based on the core functionalities of pub/sub systems. Using this framework, we then venture into a qualitative and quantitative (i.e. empirical) comparison of the common features of the two systems. Additionally, we also highlight the distinct features that each of these systems has. After enumerating a set of use cases that are best suited for RabbitMQ or Kafka, we try to guide the reader through a determination table to choose the best architecture given his/her particular set of requirements.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信