RSMQ vs ejabberd

Overview

ejabberd

Stacks33

Followers48

Votes0

GitHub Stars6.5K

Forks1.5K

RSMQ

Stacks4

Followers87

Votes6

GitHub Stars1.8K

Forks120

RSMQ vs ejabberd: What are the differences?

### Key differences between RSMQ and ejabberd

1. **Messaging Protocol**:
    RSMQ is based on Redis and uses a simple protocol over TCP sockets for messaging, whereas ejabberd is an XMPP-based server that supports a wide range of XMPP extensions and protocols for communication.

2. **Scalability**:
    RSMQ is designed for high availability and scalability by utilizing Redis as a backend, allowing for easy horizontal scaling, while ejabberd is known for its vertical scalability due to its Erlang/OTP architecture.

3. **Use Cases**:
    RSMQ is more suited for lightweight and simple messaging scenarios where Redis is already being used, while ejabberd is commonly used in real-time messaging applications, chat platforms, and IoT environments that require complex functionalities.

4. **Ease of Deployment**:
    RSMQ is easy to set up and deploy as it only requires a running Redis instance, making it convenient for small projects, whereas ejabberd may have a steeper learning curve and more infrastructure requirements due to its feature-rich nature.

5. **Community Support**:
    RSMQ has a smaller community compared to ejabberd, which has a large and active user base contributing to its continuous development, support, and availability of plugins and extensions.

6. **Persistent Storage**:
    RSMQ messages are stored in Redis, which can be both an advantage (for performance) and a limitation (for long-term storage), while ejabberd offers built-in support for persistent message storage, ensuring message durability and reliability.

In Summary, RSMQ and ejabberd differ in messaging protocol, scalability, use cases, ease of deployment, community support, and persistent storage capabilities.

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)

Manual

Detailed Comparison

ejabberd	RSMQ
It is a distributed, fault-tolerant technology that allows the creation of large-scale instant messaging applications. The server can reliably support thousands of simultaneous users on a single node and has been designed to provide exceptional standards of fault tolerance.	tl;dr: If you run a Redis server and currently use Amazon SQS or a similar message queue you might as well use this fast little replacement. Using a shared Redis server multiple Node.js processes can send / receive messages.
Cross-platform; Administrator-friendly; Internationalized; Fault-tolerant	Lightweight: Just Redis and ~500 lines of javascript.;Guaranteed delivery of a message to exactly one recipient within a messages visibility timeout.;Received messages that are not deleted will reappear after the visibility timeout.;Test coverage;Optional RESTful interface via rest-rsmq
Statistics
GitHub Stars 6.5K	GitHub Stars 1.8K
GitHub Forks 1.5K	GitHub Forks 120
Stacks 33	Stacks 4
Followers 48	Followers 87
Votes 0	Votes 6
Pros & Cons
No community feedback yet	Pros 2 Simple, does one thing well 1 Written in TypeScript 1 Written in Coffeescript 1 Backed by Redis 1 Comes with a visibility timeout feature similar to AWS
Integrations
PostgreSQL Linux MySQL Mac OS X	Redis

What are some alternatives to ejabberd, RSMQ?

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

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

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 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

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

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

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 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

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

RSMQ vs ejabberd: What are the differences?

### Key differences between RSMQ and ejabberd

1. **Messaging Protocol**:
    RSMQ is based on Redis and uses a simple protocol over TCP sockets for messaging, whereas ejabberd is an XMPP-based server that supports a wide range of XMPP extensions and protocols for communication.

2. **Scalability**:
    RSMQ is designed for high availability and scalability by utilizing Redis as a backend, allowing for easy horizontal scaling, while ejabberd is known for its vertical scalability due to its Erlang/OTP architecture.

3. **Use Cases**:
    RSMQ is more suited for lightweight and simple messaging scenarios where Redis is already being used, while ejabberd is commonly used in real-time messaging applications, chat platforms, and IoT environments that require complex functionalities.

4. **Ease of Deployment**:
    RSMQ is easy to set up and deploy as it only requires a running Redis instance, making it convenient for small projects, whereas ejabberd may have a steeper learning curve and more infrastructure requirements due to its feature-rich nature.

5. **Community Support**:
    RSMQ has a smaller community compared to ejabberd, which has a large and active user base contributing to its continuous development, support, and availability of plugins and extensions.

6. **Persistent Storage**:
    RSMQ messages are stored in Redis, which can be both an advantage (for performance) and a limitation (for long-term storage), while ejabberd offers built-in support for persistent message storage, ensuring message durability and reliability.

In Summary, RSMQ and ejabberd differ in messaging protocol, scalability, use cases, ease of deployment, community support, and persistent storage capabilities.

RSMQ vs ejabberd

Overview