4 ms·
Pulsar can have both MQ semantics and pub/sub semantics. In pub/sub it's sorta like "Kafka with all bits people found it necessary to build later already built
by EdwardDiego 3y ago
Pulsar can have both MQ semantics and pub/sub semantics. In pub/sub it's sorta like "Kafka with all bits people found it necessary to build later already built in", e.g., a proxy, schema registry, connectors, replication, tiered storage, all out of the box.
It also has lightweight streaming functions built-in, but they operate per record, so good for lightweight transforms/routing, not for stream aggregations etc.
It has more moving parts also, brokers are decoupled from storage, which is handled by BookKeeper, and replication between two clusters requires a ZooKeeper that both clusters can access, in addition to the ZK used by the brokers and bookies.
And it's a reasonably new project, so last time I looked into it, some of the documentation was incorrect, especially around managing bookies.
- relay23 3y agoMassive and complex platform.. at a certain point why not just run 2 different platforms that are best of breed for each.
- olavgg 3y agoYou can just run Pulsar standalone which is super-simple, it is a great start and scales just fine for one machine. Once you outscale one machine, you can refactor Pulsar into a distributed setup. The advantage is that everything is still familiar.