Alternatives to Embulk logo

Alternatives to Embulk

Fluentd, Sqoop, Logstash, Postman, and Amazon API Gateway are the most popular alternatives and competitors to Embulk.
22
16
+ 1
0

What is Embulk and what are its top alternatives?

It is an open-source bulk data loader that helps data transfer between various databases, storages, file formats, and cloud services.
Embulk is a tool in the API Tools category of a tech stack.
Embulk is an open source tool with 1.6K GitHub stars and 191 GitHub forks. Here’s a link to Embulk's open source repository on GitHub

Top Alternatives to Embulk

  • Fluentd

    Fluentd

    Fluentd collects events from various data sources and writes them to files, RDBMS, NoSQL, IaaS, SaaS, Hadoop and so on. Fluentd helps you unify your logging infrastructure. ...

  • Sqoop

    Sqoop

    It is a tool designed for efficiently transferring bulk data between Apache Hadoop and structured datastores such as relational databases of The Apache Software Foundation ...

  • Logstash

    Logstash

    Logstash is a tool for managing events and logs. You can use it to collect logs, parse them, and store them for later use (like, for searching). If you store them in Elasticsearch, you can view and analyze them with Kibana. ...

  • Postman

    Postman

    It is the only complete API development environment, used by nearly five million developers and more than 100,000 companies worldwide. ...

  • Amazon API Gateway

    Amazon API Gateway

    Amazon API Gateway handles all the tasks involved in accepting and processing up to hundreds of thousands of concurrent API calls, including traffic management, authorization and access control, monitoring, and API version management. ...

  • Insomnia REST Client

    Insomnia REST Client

    Insomnia is a powerful REST API Client with cookie management, environment variables, code generation, and authentication for Mac, Window, and Linux. ...

  • OpenAPI

    OpenAPI

    It is a publicly available application programming interface that provides developers with programmatic access to a proprietary software application or web service. ...

  • Paw

    Paw

    Paw is a full-featured and beautifully designed Mac app that makes interaction with REST services delightful. Either you are an API maker or consumer, Paw helps you build HTTP requests, inspect the server's response and even generate client code. ...

Embulk alternatives & related posts

Fluentd logo

Fluentd

470
553
35
Unified logging layer
470
553
+ 1
35
PROS OF FLUENTD
  • 10
    Open-source
  • 9
    Great for Kubernetes node container log forwarding
  • 9
    Lightweight
  • 7
    Easy
CONS OF FLUENTD
    Be the first to leave a con

    related Fluentd posts

    Sqoop logo

    Sqoop

    38
    36
    0
    A tool designed for efficiently transferring bulk data between Apache Hadoop and structured datastores
    38
    36
    + 1
    0
    PROS OF SQOOP
      Be the first to leave a pro
      CONS OF SQOOP
        Be the first to leave a con

        related Sqoop posts

        Logstash logo

        Logstash

        7.9K
        6K
        101
        Collect, Parse, & Enrich Data
        7.9K
        6K
        + 1
        101
        PROS OF LOGSTASH
        • 67
          Free
        • 18
          Easy but powerful filtering
        • 12
          Scalable
        • 2
          Kibana provides machine learning based analytics to log
        • 1
          Great to meet GDPR goals
        • 1
          Well Documented
        CONS OF LOGSTASH
        • 3
          Memory-intensive
        • 1
          Documentation difficult to use

        related Logstash posts

        Tymoteusz Paul
        Devops guy at X20X Development LTD · | 23 upvotes · 4.5M views

        Often enough I have to explain my way of going about setting up a CI/CD pipeline with multiple deployment platforms. Since I am a bit tired of yapping the same every single time, I've decided to write it up and share with the world this way, and send people to read it instead ;). I will explain it on "live-example" of how the Rome got built, basing that current methodology exists only of readme.md and wishes of good luck (as it usually is ;)).

        It always starts with an app, whatever it may be and reading the readmes available while Vagrant and VirtualBox is installing and updating. Following that is the first hurdle to go over - convert all the instruction/scripts into Ansible playbook(s), and only stopping when doing a clear vagrant up or vagrant reload we will have a fully working environment. As our Vagrant environment is now functional, it's time to break it! This is the moment to look for how things can be done better (too rigid/too lose versioning? Sloppy environment setup?) and replace them with the right way to do stuff, one that won't bite us in the backside. This is the point, and the best opportunity, to upcycle the existing way of doing dev environment to produce a proper, production-grade product.

        I should probably digress here for a moment and explain why. I firmly believe that the way you deploy production is the same way you should deploy develop, shy of few debugging-friendly setting. This way you avoid the discrepancy between how production work vs how development works, which almost always causes major pains in the back of the neck, and with use of proper tools should mean no more work for the developers. That's why we start with Vagrant as developer boxes should be as easy as vagrant up, but the meat of our product lies in Ansible which will do meat of the work and can be applied to almost anything: AWS, bare metal, docker, LXC, in open net, behind vpn - you name it.

        We must also give proper consideration to monitoring and logging hoovering at this point. My generic answer here is to grab Elasticsearch, Kibana, and Logstash. While for different use cases there may be better solutions, this one is well battle-tested, performs reasonably and is very easy to scale both vertically (within some limits) and horizontally. Logstash rules are easy to write and are well supported in maintenance through Ansible, which as I've mentioned earlier, are at the very core of things, and creating triggers/reports and alerts based on Elastic and Kibana is generally a breeze, including some quite complex aggregations.

        If we are happy with the state of the Ansible it's time to move on and put all those roles and playbooks to work. Namely, we need something to manage our CI/CD pipelines. For me, the choice is obvious: TeamCity. It's modern, robust and unlike most of the light-weight alternatives, it's transparent. What I mean by that is that it doesn't tell you how to do things, doesn't limit your ways to deploy, or test, or package for that matter. Instead, it provides a developer-friendly and rich playground for your pipelines. You can do most the same with Jenkins, but it has a quite dated look and feel to it, while also missing some key functionality that must be brought in via plugins (like quality REST API which comes built-in with TeamCity). It also comes with all the common-handy plugins like Slack or Apache Maven integration.

        The exact flow between CI and CD varies too greatly from one application to another to describe, so I will outline a few rules that guide me in it: 1. Make build steps as small as possible. This way when something breaks, we know exactly where, without needing to dig and root around. 2. All security credentials besides development environment must be sources from individual Vault instances. Keys to those containers should exist only on the CI/CD box and accessible by a few people (the less the better). This is pretty self-explanatory, as anything besides dev may contain sensitive data and, at times, be public-facing. Because of that appropriate security must be present. TeamCity shines in this department with excellent secrets-management. 3. Every part of the build chain shall consume and produce artifacts. If it creates nothing, it likely shouldn't be its own build. This way if any issue shows up with any environment or version, all developer has to do it is grab appropriate artifacts to reproduce the issue locally. 4. Deployment builds should be directly tied to specific Git branches/tags. This enables much easier tracking of what caused an issue, including automated identifying and tagging the author (nothing like automated regression testing!).

        Speaking of deployments, I generally try to keep it simple but also with a close eye on the wallet. Because of that, I am more than happy with AWS or another cloud provider, but also constantly peeking at the loads and do we get the value of what we are paying for. Often enough the pattern of use is not constantly erratic, but rather has a firm baseline which could be migrated away from the cloud and into bare metal boxes. That is another part where this approach strongly triumphs over the common Docker and CircleCI setup, where you are very much tied in to use cloud providers and getting out is expensive. Here to embrace bare-metal hosting all you need is a help of some container-based self-hosting software, my personal preference is with Proxmox and LXC. Following that all you must write are ansible scripts to manage hardware of Proxmox, similar way as you do for Amazon EC2 (ansible supports both greatly) and you are good to go. One does not exclude another, quite the opposite, as they can live in great synergy and cut your costs dramatically (the heavier your base load, the bigger the savings) while providing production-grade resiliency.

        See more
        Tanya Bragin
        Product Lead, Observability at Elastic · | 10 upvotes · 608K views

        ELK Stack (Elasticsearch, Logstash, Kibana) is widely known as the de facto way to centralize logs from operational systems. The assumption is that Elasticsearch (a "search engine") is a good place to put text-based logs for the purposes of free-text search. And indeed, simply searching text-based logs for the word "error" or filtering logs based on a set of a well-known tags is extremely powerful, and is often where most users start.

        See more
        Postman logo

        Postman

        62K
        50.2K
        1.8K
        Only complete API development environment
        62K
        50.2K
        + 1
        1.8K
        PROS OF POSTMAN
        • 484
          Easy to use
        • 369
          Great tool
        • 275
          Makes developing rest api's easy peasy
        • 155
          Easy setup, looks good
        • 143
          The best api workflow out there
        • 53
          It's the best
        • 53
          History feature
        • 44
          Adds real value to my workflow
        • 42
          Great interface that magically predicts your needs
        • 34
          The best in class app
        • 11
          Can save and share script
        • 9
          Fully featured without looking cluttered
        • 7
          Global/Environment Variables
        • 7
          Option to run scrips
        • 7
          Collections
        • 6
          Shareable Collections
        • 6
          Dead simple and useful. Excellent
        • 6
          Dark theme easy on the eyes
        • 5
          Awesome customer support
        • 5
          Great integration with newman
        • 4
          The test script is useful
        • 3
          Makes testing API's as easy as 1,2,3
        • 3
          Easy as pie
        • 3
          Saves responses
        • 3
          This has simplified my testing significantly
        • 3
          Simple
        • 3
          Documentation
        • 2
          Mocking API calls with predefined response
        • 2
          I'd recommend it to everyone who works with apis
        • 2
          API-network
        • 1
          Easy to setup, test and provides test storage
        • 1
          Continuous integration using newman
        • 1
          Graph
        • 1
          Pre-request Script and Test attributes are invaluable
        • 1
          Postman Runner CI Integration
        • 1
          Now supports GraphQL
        • 0
          <a href="http://fixbit.com/">useful tool</a>
        • 0
          Runner
        CONS OF POSTMAN
        • 9
          Stores credentials in HTTP
        • 7
          Poor GraphQL support
        • 7
          Bloated features and UI
        • 6
          Cumbersome to switch authentication tokens
        • 2
          Expensive
        • 1
          Support websocket
        • 1
          Import curl
        • 1
          Import swagger
        • 1
          Can't prompt for per-request variables

        related Postman posts

        Noah Zoschke
        Engineering Manager at Segment · | 30 upvotes · 2M views

        We just launched the Segment Config API (try it out for yourself here) — a set of public REST APIs that enable you to manage your Segment configuration. A public API is only as good as its #documentation. For the API reference doc we are using Postman.

        Postman is an “API development environment”. You download the desktop app, and build API requests by URL and payload. Over time you can build up a set of requests and organize them into a “Postman Collection”. You can generalize a collection with “collection variables”. This allows you to parameterize things like username, password and workspace_name so a user can fill their own values in before making an API call. This makes it possible to use Postman for one-off API tasks instead of writing code.

        Then you can add Markdown content to the entire collection, a folder of related methods, and/or every API method to explain how the APIs work. You can publish a collection and easily share it with a URL.

        This turns Postman from a personal #API utility to full-blown public interactive API documentation. The result is a great looking web page with all the API calls, docs and sample requests and responses in one place. Check out the results here.

        Postman’s powers don’t end here. You can automate Postman with “test scripts” and have it periodically run a collection scripts as “monitors”. We now have #QA around all the APIs in public docs to make sure they are always correct

        Along the way we tried other techniques for documenting APIs like ReadMe.io or Swagger UI. These required a lot of effort to customize.

        Writing and maintaining a Postman collection takes some work, but the resulting documentation site, interactivity and API testing tools are well worth it.

        See more
        Simon Reymann
        Senior Fullstack Developer at QUANTUSflow Software GmbH · | 25 upvotes · 2M views

        Our whole Node.js backend stack consists of the following tools:

        • Lerna as a tool for multi package and multi repository management
        • npm as package manager
        • NestJS as Node.js framework
        • TypeScript as programming language
        • ExpressJS as web server
        • Swagger UI for visualizing and interacting with the API’s resources
        • Postman as a tool for API development
        • TypeORM as object relational mapping layer
        • JSON Web Token for access token management

        The main reason we have chosen Node.js over PHP is related to the following artifacts:

        • Made for the web and widely in use: Node.js is a software platform for developing server-side network services. Well-known projects that rely on Node.js include the blogging software Ghost, the project management tool Trello and the operating system WebOS. Node.js requires the JavaScript runtime environment V8, which was specially developed by Google for the popular Chrome browser. This guarantees a very resource-saving architecture, which qualifies Node.js especially for the operation of a web server. Ryan Dahl, the developer of Node.js, released the first stable version on May 27, 2009. He developed Node.js out of dissatisfaction with the possibilities that JavaScript offered at the time. The basic functionality of Node.js has been mapped with JavaScript since the first version, which can be expanded with a large number of different modules. The current package managers (npm or Yarn) for Node.js know more than 1,000,000 of these modules.
        • Fast server-side solutions: Node.js adopts the JavaScript "event-loop" to create non-blocking I/O applications that conveniently serve simultaneous events. With the standard available asynchronous processing within JavaScript/TypeScript, highly scalable, server-side solutions can be realized. The efficient use of the CPU and the RAM is maximized and more simultaneous requests can be processed than with conventional multi-thread servers.
        • A language along the entire stack: Widely used frameworks such as React or AngularJS or Vue.js, which we prefer, are written in JavaScript/TypeScript. If Node.js is now used on the server side, you can use all the advantages of a uniform script language throughout the entire application development. The same language in the back- and frontend simplifies the maintenance of the application and also the coordination within the development team.
        • Flexibility: Node.js sets very few strict dependencies, rules and guidelines and thus grants a high degree of flexibility in application development. There are no strict conventions so that the appropriate architecture, design structures, modules and features can be freely selected for the development.
        See more
        Amazon API Gateway logo

        Amazon API Gateway

        1.1K
        833
        41
        Create, publish, maintain, monitor, and secure APIs at any scale
        1.1K
        833
        + 1
        41
        PROS OF AMAZON API GATEWAY
        • 35
          AWS Integration
        • 5
          Websockets
        • 1
          Serverless
        CONS OF AMAZON API GATEWAY
        • 1
          Less expensive
        • 1
          No websocket broadcast

        related Amazon API Gateway posts

        A Luthra
        VP Software Engrg at Reliant · | 3 upvotes · 408.6K views
        Shared insights
        on
        Apigee
        Amazon API Gateway

        Amazon API Gateway vs Apigee. How do they compare as an API Gateway? What is the equivalent functionality, similarities, and differences moving from Apigee API GW to AWS API GW?

        See more
        Insomnia REST Client logo

        Insomnia REST Client

        554
        462
        37
        The most intuitive cross-platform REST API Client 😴
        554
        462
        + 1
        37
        PROS OF INSOMNIA REST CLIENT
        • 15
          Easy to work with
        • 10
          Great user interface
        • 6
          Works with GraphQL
        • 2
          Cross platform, available for Mac, Windows, and Linux
        • 2
          Opensource
        • 2
          Preserves request templates
        • 0
          Vim and Emacs key map
        • 0
          Does not have history feature
        CONS OF INSOMNIA REST CLIENT
        • 2
          Do not store credentials in HTTP
        • 2
          Do not have team sharing options

        related Insomnia REST Client posts

        Jason Barry
        Cofounder at FeaturePeek · | 4 upvotes · 1.9M views

        We've tried a couple REST clients over the years, and Insomnia REST Client has won us over the most. Here's what we like about it compared to other contenders in this category:

        • Uncluttered UI. Things are only in your face when you need them, and the app is visually organized in an intuitive manner.
        • Native Mac app. We wanted the look and feel to be on par with other apps in our OS rather than a web app / Electron app (cough Postman).
        • Easy team sync. Other apps have this too, but Insomnia's model best sets the "set and forget" mentality. Syncs are near instant and I'm always assured that I'm working on the latest version of API endpoints. Apps like Paw use a git-based approach to revision history, but I think this actually over-complicates the sync feature. For ensuring I'm always working on the latest version of something, I'd rather have the sync model be closer to Dropbox's than git's, and Insomnia is closer to Dropbox in that regard.

        Some features like automatic public-facing documentation aren't supported, but we currently don't have any public APIs, so this didn't matter to us.

        See more
        OpenAPI logo

        OpenAPI

        305
        252
        0
        Allows the owner of a network-accessible service to give universal access
        305
        252
        + 1
        0
        PROS OF OPENAPI
          Be the first to leave a pro
          CONS OF OPENAPI
            Be the first to leave a con

            related OpenAPI posts

            Joshua Dean Küpper
            CEO at Scrayos UG (haftungsbeschränkt) · | 4 upvotes · 216K views

            We use Swagger Inspector in conjunction with our universal REST-API "Charon". Swagger Inspector makes testing edge-cases hassle-free and lets testing look easy. Swagger Inspector was also a great help to explore the Mojang-API, that we are dependent on, because it is the central repository for minecraft-account-data.

            We previously used Postman but decided to switch over to Swagger Inspector because it also integrated seamlessly into Swagger UI, which we use for displaying our OpenAPI specification of said REST-API.

            See more
            Paw logo

            Paw

            204
            250
            165
            The ultimate REST client for Mac
            204
            250
            + 1
            165
            PROS OF PAW
            • 46
              Great interface
            • 38
              Easy to use
            • 25
              More stable and performant than the others
            • 16
              Saves endpoints list for testing
            • 13
              Supports environment variables
            • 12
              Integrations
            • 9
              Multi-Dimension Environment Settings
            • 4
              Paste curl commands into Paw
            • 2
              Creates code for any language or framework
            CONS OF PAW
            • 3
              It's not free
            • 2
              MacOS Only

            related Paw posts

            Jason Barry
            Cofounder at FeaturePeek · | 4 upvotes · 1.9M views

            We've tried a couple REST clients over the years, and Insomnia REST Client has won us over the most. Here's what we like about it compared to other contenders in this category:

            • Uncluttered UI. Things are only in your face when you need them, and the app is visually organized in an intuitive manner.
            • Native Mac app. We wanted the look and feel to be on par with other apps in our OS rather than a web app / Electron app (cough Postman).
            • Easy team sync. Other apps have this too, but Insomnia's model best sets the "set and forget" mentality. Syncs are near instant and I'm always assured that I'm working on the latest version of API endpoints. Apps like Paw use a git-based approach to revision history, but I think this actually over-complicates the sync feature. For ensuring I'm always working on the latest version of something, I'd rather have the sync model be closer to Dropbox's than git's, and Insomnia is closer to Dropbox in that regard.

            Some features like automatic public-facing documentation aren't supported, but we currently don't have any public APIs, so this didn't matter to us.

            See more