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. Airflow vs Kafka

Airflow vs Kafka

OverviewDecisionsComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Kafka
Kafka
Stacks24.2K
Followers22.3K
Votes607
GitHub Stars31.2K
Forks14.8K
Airflow
Airflow
Stacks1.7K
Followers2.8K
Votes128

Airflow vs Kafka: What are the differences?

Airflow and Kafka are distributed systems that address different aspects of data processing. Let's explore the key differences between them.

  1. Data Streaming vs Workflow Management: The key difference between Airflow and Kafka lies in their primary use cases. Airflow is primarily a workflow management tool, used to schedule and orchestrate complex data workflows. On the other hand, Kafka is a distributed streaming platform that handles high-throughput, fault-tolerant streaming of data in real-time.

  2. Data Processing Paradigm: Another significant difference between Airflow and Kafka is their data processing paradigms. Airflow follows a batch processing paradigm, where data is processed in discrete batches at regular intervals. This makes it well-suited for scenarios where data can be processed in a batch-oriented manner. Kafka, on the other hand, follows a stream processing paradigm, where data is processed in real-time as it arrives, enabling low-latency data processing.

  3. Scalability: When it comes to scalability, Kafka holds the edge over Airflow. Kafka is designed to handle high-velocity data streams and can scale horizontally across multiple nodes to handle increasing data volumes. This makes it suitable for use cases that require real-time data processing at large scale. Airflow, while it can handle large workflows, may face limitations in terms of scalability for high-velocity data processing.

  4. Data Durability: Both Airflow and Kafka provide durability for data, but they achieve it in different ways. Airflow relies on external systems such as databases or object storage for data persistence. In contrast, Kafka provides built-in durability by replicating data across multiple nodes within a Kafka cluster. This ensures data availability and fault-tolerance even in the event of node failures.

  5. Use of Producers and Consumers: Kafka operates based on the concept of producers and consumers. Producers are responsible for publishing data to Kafka topics, while consumers consume data from these topics. Airflow, on the other hand, does not have a similar concept of producers and consumers. Instead, it focuses on managing the execution of tasks within a workflow and tracking their dependencies.

  6. Community and Ecosystem: Airflow and Kafka also differ in terms of their community and ecosystem. Airflow has a thriving open-source community and a wide range of pre-built operators that make it easier to integrate with various data sources and destinations. Kafka, being a distributed streaming platform, has its own ecosystem of tools and frameworks built around it, such as Kafka Streams and Kafka Connect, which provide additional capabilities for stream processing and data integration.

In summary, Airflow is a workflow management tool primarily used for batch-oriented data processing, while Kafka is a distributed streaming platform designed for real-time data processing at scale. Airflow focuses on managing workflows and dependencies, while Kafka enables low-latency stream processing. Kafka offers scalability, built-in durability, and a specific producer-consumer model, while Airflow has a strong community and broader ecosystem.

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 Kafka, Airflow

viradiya
viradiya

Apr 12, 2020

Needs adviceonAngularJSAngularJSASP.NET CoreASP.NET CoreMSSQLMSSQL

We are going to develop a microservices-based application. It consists of AngularJS, ASP.NET Core, and MSSQL.

We have 3 types of microservices. Emailservice, Filemanagementservice, Filevalidationservice

I am a beginner in microservices. But I have read about RabbitMQ, but come to know that there are Redis and Kafka also in the market. So, I want to know which is best.

933k views933k
Comments
Ishfaq
Ishfaq

Feb 28, 2020

Needs advice

Our backend application is sending some external messages to a third party application at the end of each backend (CRUD) API call (from UI) and these external messages take too much extra time (message building, processing, then sent to the third party and log success/failure), UI application has no concern to these extra third party messages.

So currently we are sending these third party messages by creating a new child thread at end of each REST API call so UI application doesn't wait for these extra third party API calls.

I want to integrate Apache Kafka for these extra third party API calls, so I can also retry on failover third party API calls in a queue(currently third party messages are sending from multiple threads at the same time which uses too much processing and resources) and logging, etc.

Question 1: Is this a use case of a message broker?

Question 2: If it is then Kafka vs RabitMQ which is the better?

804k views804k
Comments
Roman
Roman

Senior Back-End Developer, Software Architect

Feb 12, 2019

ReviewonKafkaKafka

I use Kafka because it has almost infinite scaleability in terms of processing events (could be scaled to process hundreds of thousands of events), great monitoring (all sorts of metrics are exposed via JMX).

Downsides of using Kafka are:

  • you have to deal with Zookeeper
  • you have to implement advanced routing yourself (compared to RabbitMQ it has no advanced routing)
10.8k views10.8k
Comments

Detailed Comparison

Kafka
Kafka
Airflow
Airflow

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

Use Airflow to author workflows as directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) of tasks. The Airflow scheduler executes your tasks on an array of workers while following the specified dependencies. Rich command lines utilities makes performing complex surgeries on DAGs a snap. The rich user interface makes it easy to visualize pipelines running in production, monitor progress and troubleshoot issues when needed.

Written at LinkedIn in Scala;Used by LinkedIn to offload processing of all page and other views;Defaults to using persistence, uses OS disk cache for hot data (has higher throughput then any of the above having persistence enabled);Supports both on-line as off-line processing
Dynamic: Airflow pipelines are configuration as code (Python), allowing for dynamic pipeline generation. This allows for writting code that instantiate pipelines dynamically.;Extensible: Easily define your own operators, executors and extend the library so that it fits the level of abstraction that suits your environment.;Elegant: Airflow pipelines are lean and explicit. Parameterizing your scripts is built in the core of Airflow using powerful Jinja templating engine.;Scalable: Airflow has a modular architecture and uses a message queue to talk to orchestrate an arbitrary number of workers. Airflow is ready to scale to infinity.
Statistics
GitHub Stars
31.2K
GitHub Stars
-
GitHub Forks
14.8K
GitHub Forks
-
Stacks
24.2K
Stacks
1.7K
Followers
22.3K
Followers
2.8K
Votes
607
Votes
128
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 126
    High-throughput
  • 119
    Distributed
  • 92
    Scalable
  • 86
    High-Performance
  • 66
    Durable
Cons
  • 32
    Non-Java clients are second-class citizens
  • 29
    Needs Zookeeper
  • 9
    Operational difficulties
  • 5
    Terrible Packaging
Pros
  • 53
    Features
  • 14
    Task Dependency Management
  • 12
    Beautiful UI
  • 12
    Cluster of workers
  • 10
    Extensibility
Cons
  • 2
    Open source - provides minimum or no support
  • 2
    Running it on kubernetes cluster relatively complex
  • 2
    Observability is not great when the DAGs exceed 250
  • 1
    Logical separation of DAGs is not straight forward

What are some alternatives to Kafka, Airflow?

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.

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