2 Answers
- Newest
- Most votes
- Most comments
0
While SQS is a message queue service that is fully managed, Kafka, in contrast, is a self-managed platform that serves as a distributed streaming platform, enabling the real-time processing of streaming data. If you require a message queue service that is fully managed and offers both standard and FIFO delivery options, SQS might be the suitable option. Conversely, if you require a distributed streaming platform capable of storing and processing real-time data, Kafka may be a more suitable choice.
0
- Scalable - SQS scales automatically to your needs without you needing to do anything. In Kafka you will need to set the cluster size, and changing it might be challenging.
- Performance - What do you mean by that in this case? Throughput? SQS can handle any load, Kafka depends on the cluster size. Latency? You will need to test to find out which is better in your use case.
- Cost effectiveness - In SQS you pay by the number of API calls that you make (which correlates to the number of messages you send), in Kafka you pay by the cluster size, regardless of the number of messages. In most cases I think that SQS will cost less, but ut may be that in very high numbers Kafka will be more cost effective. You will need to do the math for your use case.
- Reliable - Both of them are very reliable services used by many users.
- SQS has no management complexity. You just create the queue and start using it with the different SDKs. Kafka on the other hand you will need to create a cluster, guess it's sizing, manage it, etc. Much more complex.
I would say that in most cases, SQS will be the better option, unless you have some specific requirements.
Relevant content
- asked 8 months ago
- AWS OFFICIALUpdated 3 years ago
- AWS OFFICIALUpdated 5 months ago
- AWS OFFICIALUpdated 7 months ago
- AWS OFFICIALUpdated 2 years ago