StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. Utilities
  3. Background Jobs
  4. Message Queue
  5. Amazon SQS vs Kestrel

Amazon SQS vs Kestrel

OverviewDecisionsComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Amazon SQS
Amazon SQS
Stacks2.8K
Followers2.0K
Votes171
Kestrel
Kestrel
Stacks37
Followers58
Votes0

Amazon SQS vs Kestrel: What are the differences?

Introduction

When choosing between Amazon SQS and Kestrel as messaging systems, there are several key differences to consider.

  1. Message Retention: Amazon SQS has a default retention period of 4 days, while Kestrel allows users to configure the retention period as needed. This flexibility in message retention can be crucial for handling different types of workloads and storage needs.

  2. Scalability: Amazon SQS is monitored and managed by AWS, making it highly scalable and suitable for handling large volumes of messages. On the other hand, Kestrel may require more manual intervention and configuration for scaling efficiently, especially in high-demand scenarios.

  3. Availability: Amazon SQS is designed to be highly available and fault-tolerant, ensuring that messages are reliably delivered even in challenging conditions. Kestrel's availability may depend more on the setup and infrastructure configuration, potentially requiring additional efforts to maintain high availability.

  4. Pricing Structure: Amazon SQS charges based on the number of requests and data transfer, while Kestrel is an open-source solution with no direct costs associated. Organizations looking for a cost-effective option may prefer Kestrel for its pricing model.

  5. Integration with Ecosystem: Amazon SQS seamlessly integrates with other AWS services, making it a convenient choice for organizations already using the AWS ecosystem. In contrast, Kestrel may require more customization and integration work to fit into existing systems and workflows.

  6. Community Support: Amazon SQS benefits from being a managed service with extensive documentation and support options provided by AWS. In comparison, Kestrel's community support may vary depending on the user base and developers actively contributing to the project.

In Summary, Amazon SQS and Kestrel have distinct differences in terms of message retention, scalability, availability, pricing structure, integration with the ecosystem, and community support, making it essential for organizations to consider their specific requirements when choosing a messaging system.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs
CLI (Node.js)
or
Manual

Advice on Amazon SQS, Kestrel

Pulkit
Pulkit

Software Engineer

Oct 30, 2020

Needs adviceonDjangoDjangoAmazon SQSAmazon SQSRabbitMQRabbitMQ

Hi! I am creating a scraping system in Django, which involves long running tasks between 1 minute & 1 Day. As I am new to Message Brokers and Task Queues, I need advice on which architecture to use for my system. ( Amazon SQS, RabbitMQ, or Celery). The system should be autoscalable using Kubernetes(K8) based on the number of pending tasks in the queue.

474k views474k
Comments
Meili
Meili

Software engineer at Digital Science

Sep 24, 2020

Needs adviceonZeroMQZeroMQRabbitMQRabbitMQAmazon SQSAmazon SQS

Hi, we are in a ZMQ set up in a push/pull pattern, and we currently start to have more traffic and cases that the service is unavailable or stuck. We want to:

  • Not loose messages in services outages
  • Safely restart service without losing messages (@{ZeroMQ}|tool:1064| seems to need to close the socket in the receiver before restart manually)

Do you have experience with this setup with ZeroMQ? Would you suggest RabbitMQ or Amazon SQS (we are in AWS setup) instead? Something else?

Thank you for your time

500k views500k
Comments
MITHIRIDI
MITHIRIDI

Software Engineer at LightMetrics

May 8, 2020

Needs adviceonAmazon SQSAmazon SQSAmazon MQAmazon MQ

I want to schedule a message. Amazon SQS provides a delay of 15 minutes, but I want it in some hours.

Example: Let's say a Message1 is consumed by a consumer A but somehow it failed inside the consumer. I would want to put it in a queue and retry after 4hrs. Can I do this in Amazon MQ? I have seen in some Amazon MQ videos saying scheduling messages can be done. But, I'm not sure how.

303k views303k
Comments

Detailed Comparison

Amazon SQS
Amazon SQS
Kestrel
Kestrel

Transmit any volume of data, at any level of throughput, without losing messages or requiring other services to be always available. With SQS, you can offload the administrative burden of operating and scaling a highly available messaging cluster, while paying a low price for only what you use.

Kestrel is based on Blaine Cook's "starling" simple, distributed message queue, with added features and bulletproofing, as well as the scalability offered by actors and the JVM.

A queue can be created in any region.;The message payload can contain up to 256KB of text in any format. Each 64KB ‘chunk’ of payload is billed as 1 request. For example, a single API call with a 256KB payload will be billed as four requests.;Messages can be sent, received or deleted in batches of up to 10 messages or 256KB. Batches cost the same amount as single messages, meaning SQS can be even more cost effective for customers that use batching.;Long polling reduces extraneous polling to help you minimize cost while receiving new messages as quickly as possible. When your queue is empty, long-poll requests wait up to 20 seconds for the next message to arrive. Long poll requests cost the same amount as regular requests.;Messages can be retained in queues for up to 14 days.;Messages can be sent and read simultaneously.;Developers can get started with Amazon SQS by using only five APIs: CreateQueue, SendMessage, ReceiveMessage, ChangeMessageVisibility, and DeleteMessage. Additional APIs are available to provide advanced functionality.
Written by Robey Pointer;Starling clone written in Scala (a port of Starling from Ruby to Scala);Queues are stored in memory, but logged on disk
Statistics
Stacks
2.8K
Stacks
37
Followers
2.0K
Followers
58
Votes
171
Votes
0
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 62
    Easy to use, reliable
  • 40
    Low cost
  • 28
    Simple
  • 14
    Doesn't need to maintain it
  • 8
    It is Serverless
Cons
  • 2
    Has a max message size (currently 256K)
  • 2
    Difficult to configure
  • 2
    Proprietary
  • 1
    Has a maximum 15 minutes of delayed messages only
No community feedback yet

What are some alternatives to Amazon SQS, Kestrel?

Kafka

Kafka

Kafka is a distributed, partitioned, replicated commit log service. It provides the functionality of a messaging system, but with a unique design.

RabbitMQ

RabbitMQ

RabbitMQ gives your applications a common platform to send and receive messages, and your messages a safe place to live until received.

Celery

Celery

Celery is an asynchronous task queue/job queue based on distributed message passing. It is focused on real-time operation, but supports scheduling as well.

NSQ

NSQ

NSQ is a realtime distributed messaging platform designed to operate at scale, handling billions of messages per day. It promotes distributed and decentralized topologies without single points of failure, enabling fault tolerance and high availability coupled with a reliable message delivery guarantee. See features & guarantees.

ActiveMQ

ActiveMQ

Apache ActiveMQ is fast, supports many Cross Language Clients and Protocols, comes with easy to use Enterprise Integration Patterns and many advanced features while fully supporting JMS 1.1 and J2EE 1.4. Apache ActiveMQ is released under the Apache 2.0 License.

ZeroMQ

ZeroMQ

The 0MQ lightweight messaging kernel is a library which extends the standard socket interfaces with features traditionally provided by specialised messaging middleware products. 0MQ sockets provide an abstraction of asynchronous message queues, multiple messaging patterns, message filtering (subscriptions), seamless access to multiple transport protocols and more.

Apache NiFi

Apache NiFi

An easy to use, powerful, and reliable system to process and distribute data. It supports powerful and scalable directed graphs of data routing, transformation, and system mediation logic.

Gearman

Gearman

Gearman allows you to do work in parallel, to load balance processing, and to call functions between languages. It can be used in a variety of applications, from high-availability web sites to the transport of database replication events.

Memphis

Memphis

Highly scalable and effortless data streaming platform. Made to enable developers and data teams to collaborate and build real-time and streaming apps fast.

IronMQ

IronMQ

An easy-to-use highly available message queuing service. Built for distributed cloud applications with critical messaging needs. Provides on-demand message queuing with advanced features and cloud-optimized performance.

Related Comparisons

Bootstrap
Materialize

Bootstrap vs Materialize

Laravel
Django

Django vs Laravel vs Node.js

Bootstrap
Foundation

Bootstrap vs Foundation vs Material UI

Node.js
Spring Boot

Node.js vs Spring-Boot

Liquibase
Flyway

Flyway vs Liquibase