3 ms·

Pulsar is half baked with limited number of half baked clients even for major languages. Kafka instead is a bulletproof solution with tons of clients in any fla

• skyde 6y ago
  Pulsar itself is solid but it’s true number of good clients is limited. Same is true for kafka the only reliable client is the java one. All other are based on librdkafka which still have many major bugs causing it to be stuck and not producing to new leader during leader changes. One benefit of pulsar is that the client library is completely stateless and much simple. It does not need to know where data is stored it’s all handled by the pulsar broker.
• mianos 6y ago
  I have used the C++, python and Java clients and they are all pretty usable. Pulsar deployment support is great. It seems the teams deploy it themselves.
• rocho 6y ago
  I just checked and they have a websocket API which I imagine is usable in almost every language. We might use it ourselves instead of the official Python library which is not async. Async publishing and consuming is a requirement for our project.
• manigandham 6y ago
  Pulsar is far better designed than Kafka and is much more reliable and scalable. Clients in every language are an entirely different issue and mostly down to developer bandwidth because it's a small team. Kafka actually doesn't have that many great clients either, they all are just wrappers around the C++ librdkafka library. Pulsar clients are also easy to create because of the stateless protocol, per-message acknowledgements, and optional websockets API. Or you can just use their Kafka bridge adapter and use your existing Kafka clients.