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. Apache Pulsar vs VerneMQ

Apache Pulsar vs VerneMQ

OverviewComparisonAlternatives

Overview

VerneMQ
VerneMQ
Stacks31
Followers136
Votes6
Apache Pulsar
Apache Pulsar
Stacks119
Followers199
Votes24

Apache Pulsar vs VerneMQ: What are the differences?

Introduction: This Markdown will outline the key differences between Apache Pulsar and VerneMQ, two popular open-source messaging systems used for various applications.

  1. Architecture: Apache Pulsar utilizes a layered architecture, with separate components for serving, storage, and bookkeeping. In contrast, VerneMQ follows a distributed architecture that allows for high availability and fault tolerance by using a shared-nothing design where each node operates independently.

  2. Protocol Support: While Apache Pulsar predominantly supports the Pulsar messaging protocol, VerneMQ focuses on supporting MQTT (Message Queuing Telemetry Transport) for efficient and lightweight communication between devices in Internet of Things (IoT) applications.

  3. Scalability: Apache Pulsar is known for its seamless scalability, allowing users to expand their cluster without service interruption using a technique called "auto scaling". VerneMQ, on the other hand, provides scalable message processing through clustering for horizontal scaling across multiple nodes.

  4. Persistence: A significant difference lies in the way data is persisted in both systems. Apache Pulsar stores data on a distributed log storage system like Apache BookKeeper, offering durability and reliability. VerneMQ utilizes a storage backend to maintain message persistence across nodes in the cluster.

  5. Management Tools: Apache Pulsar provides a comprehensive set of management tools and APIs for monitoring, analyzing, and managing the messaging system. VerneMQ, on the other hand, offers simplicity in management with features like distributed message routing and clustering at the core without extensive management tools.

  6. Language Support: Apache Pulsar supports multiple programming languages for client libraries, including Java, Python, Go, and C++. VerneMQ primarily focuses on supporting Erlang and Elixir for building scalable and fault-tolerant message-oriented systems.

In Summary, Apache Pulsar and VerneMQ differ in architecture, protocol support, scalability, persistence mechanisms, management tools, and language support, catering to diverse messaging system requirements.

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

Detailed Comparison

VerneMQ
VerneMQ
Apache Pulsar
Apache Pulsar

VerneMQ is a distributed MQTT message broker, implemented in Erlang/OTP. It's open source, and Apache 2 licensed. VerneMQ implements the MQTT 3.1, 3.1.1 and 5.0 specifications.

Apache Pulsar is a distributed messaging solution developed and released to open source at Yahoo. Pulsar supports both pub-sub messaging and queuing in a platform designed for performance, scalability, and ease of development and operation.

Open Source, Apache 2 licensed; QoS 0, QoS 1, QoS 2; MQTT v5.0 fully implemented; Basic Authentication and Authorization; Bridge Support; $SYS Tree for monitoring and reporting; TLS (SSL) Encryption; Websockets Support; Cluster Support with sophisticated self-healing mechanisms; Queue Migration; Prometheus Monitoring; Logging (Console, Files, Syslog); Reporting to Graphite; Extensible Plugin architecture (Erlang, Elixir, Lua); WebHooks Plugins; Multiple Sessions per ClientId; Shared Subscriptions; Proxy Protocol v1, v2;
Unified model supporting pub-sub messaging and queuing; Easy scalability to millions of topics; Native multi-datacenter replication; Multi-language client API; Guaranteed data durability; Scalable distributed storage leveraging Apache BookKeeper
Statistics
Stacks
31
Stacks
119
Followers
136
Followers
199
Votes
6
Votes
24
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 1
    Fully open source clustering
  • 1
    MQTT v5 implementation
  • 1
    Open Source Message and Metadata Persistence
  • 1
    Proxy Protocol support
  • 1
    Open Source Plugin System
Pros
  • 7
    Simple
  • 4
    Scalable
  • 3
    High-throughput
  • 2
    Multi-tenancy
  • 2
    Geo-replication
Cons
  • 1
    Only Supports Topics
  • 1
    Not jms compliant
  • 1
    No guaranteed dliefvery
  • 1
    No one and only one delivery
  • 1
    LImited Language support(6)
Integrations
MySQL
MySQL
MongoDB
MongoDB
PostgreSQL
PostgreSQL
Memcached
Memcached
Redis
Redis
No integrations available

What are some alternatives to VerneMQ, Apache Pulsar?

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.

Amazon SQS

Amazon SQS

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.

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.

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