Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Amazon MQ vs Kestrel: What are the differences?
Introduction
Amazon MQ and Kestrel are message queue services used for handling messaging between applications in a distributed system.
Protocol Support: Amazon MQ supports popular messaging protocols such as MQTT, AMQP, and STOMP, providing flexibility for different types of applications to communicate. On the other hand, Kestrel only supports the Thrift protocol, limiting its compatibility with other messaging systems.
Managed Service: Amazon MQ is a fully managed service provided by AWS, offering hassle-free setup, maintenance, and scalability. Kestrel, on the other hand, requires manual configuration and monitoring, making it more suitable for organizations with specific customization needs and the technical expertise to manage it.
Scaling Capabilities: Amazon MQ offers auto-scaling capabilities, allowing the service to adjust resources based on demand to ensure optimal performance and cost efficiency. Kestrel, although capable of horizontal scaling, relies on manual intervention for scaling operations, which can be cumbersome and time-consuming in high-traffic environments.
Redundancy and High Availability: Amazon MQ provides out-of-the-box redundancy and high-availability features, ensuring message reliability and fault tolerance. In contrast, Kestrel may require custom configurations and additional setup to achieve similar levels of redundancy and availability.
Monitoring and Metrics: Amazon MQ offers comprehensive monitoring and metrics through AWS CloudWatch, providing insights into message queue performance and health. Kestrel, being a more lightweight solution, may lack built-in monitoring capabilities and may require integration with third-party tools for monitoring and analysis.
Integration with AWS Services: Amazon MQ seamlessly integrates with various AWS services such as Lambda, S3, and EC2, facilitating seamless communication and data exchange within the AWS ecosystem. Kestrel, being an independent service, may require additional configuration and setup to integrate with AWS services, potentially adding complexity to the integration process.
In Summary, Amazon MQ and Kestrel differ in terms of protocol support, managed service, scaling capabilities, redundancy, monitoring, and integration with AWS services.
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.
Mithiridi, I believe you are talking about two different things. 1. If you need to process messages with delays of more 15m or at specific times, it's not a good idea to use queues, independently of tool SQM, Rabbit or Amazon MQ. you should considerer another approach using a scheduled job. 2. For dead queues and policy retries RabbitMQ, for example, doesn't support your use case. https://medium.com/@kiennguyen88/rabbitmq-delay-retry-schedule-with-dead-letter-exchange-31fb25a440fc I'm not sure if that is possible SNS/SQS support, they have a maximum delay for delivery (maxDelayTarget) in seconds but it's not clear the number. You can check this out: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/sns/latest/dg/sns-message-delivery-retries.html
Pros of Amazon MQ
- Supports low IQ developers7
- Supports existing protocols (JMS, NMS, AMQP, STOMP, …)3
- Easy to migrate existing messaging service2
Pros of Kestrel
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Amazon MQ
- Slow AF4
