Amazon SNS vs RabbitMQ: What are the differences?
Amazon SNS: Fully managed push messaging service. Amazon Simple Notification Service makes it simple and cost-effective to push to mobile devices such as iPhone, iPad, Android, Kindle Fire, and internet connected smart devices, as well as pushing to other distributed services. Besides pushing cloud notifications directly to mobile devices, SNS can also deliver notifications by SMS text message or email, to Simple Queue Service (SQS) queues, or to any HTTP endpoint; RabbitMQ: A messaging broker - an intermediary for messaging. RabbitMQ gives your applications a common platform to send and receive messages, and your messages a safe place to live until received.
Amazon SNS can be classified as a tool in the "Mobile Push Messaging" category, while RabbitMQ is grouped under "Message Queue".
Some of the features offered by Amazon SNS are:
- In most cases, developers can get started with Amazon SNS by using just three APIs: CreateTopic, Subscribe, and Publish. Additional APIs are available, which provide more advanced functionality.
- With SNS you can publish a message once, and deliver it one or more times. So you can choose to direct unique messages to individual Apple, Google or Amazon devices, or broadcast deliveries to many mobile devices with a single publish request.
- SNS allows you to group multiple recipients using topics. A topic is an “access point” for allowing recipients to dynamically subscribe for identical copies of the same notification. One topic can support deliveries to multiple endpoint types -- for example, you can group together iOS, Android and SMS recipients. When you publish once to a topic, SNS delivers appropriately formatted copies of your message to each subscriber.
On the other hand, RabbitMQ provides the following key features:
- Robust messaging for applications
- Easy to use
- Runs on all major operating systems
RabbitMQ is an open source tool with 5.95K GitHub stars and 1.78K GitHub forks. Here's a link to RabbitMQ's open source repository on GitHub.
reddit, 9GAG, and Rainist are some of the popular companies that use RabbitMQ, whereas Amazon SNS is used by Intuit, PedidosYa, and Clever. RabbitMQ has a broader approval, being mentioned in 941 company stacks & 551 developers stacks; compared to Amazon SNS, which is listed in 230 company stacks and 78 developer stacks.
What is Amazon SNS?
What is RabbitMQ?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Sign up to add, upvote and see more prosMake informed product decisions
What are the cons of using Amazon SNS?
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions
As Sentry runs throughout the day, there are about 50 different offline tasks that we execute—anything from “process this event, pretty please” to “send all of these cool people some emails.” There are some that we execute once a day and some that execute thousands per second.
Managing this variety requires a reliably high-throughput message-passing technology. We use Celery's RabbitMQ implementation, and we stumbled upon a great feature called Federation that allows us to partition our task queue across any number of RabbitMQ servers and gives us the confidence that, if any single server gets backlogged, others will pitch in and distribute some of the backlogged tasks to their consumers.
The question for which Message Queue to use mentioned "availability, distributed, scalability, and monitoring". I don't think that this excludes many options already. I does not sound like you would take advantage of Kafka's strengths (replayability, based on an even sourcing architecture). You could pick one of the AMQP options.
I would recommend the RabbitMQ message broker, which not only implements the AMQP standard 0.9.1 (it can support 1.x or other protocols as well) but has also several very useful extensions built in. It ticks the boxes you mentioned and on top you will get a very flexible system, that allows you to build the architecture, pick the options and trade-offs that suite your case best.
For more information about RabbitMQ, please have a look at the linked markdown I assembled. The second half explains many configuration options. It also contains links to managed hosting and to libraries (though it is missing Python's - which should be Puka, I assume).
I used Kafka originally because it was mandated as part of the top-level IT requirements at a Fortune 500 client. What I found was that it was orders of magnitude more complex ...and powerful than my daily Beanstalkd , and far more flexible, resilient, and manageable than RabbitMQ.
So for any case where utmost flexibility and resilience are part of the deal, I would use Kafka again. But due to the complexities involved, for any time where this level of scalability is not required, I would probably just use Beanstalkd for its simplicity.
I tend to find RabbitMQ to be in an uncomfortable middle place between these two extremities.
Automations are what makes a CRM powerful. With Celery and RabbitMQ we've been able to make powerful automations that truly works for our clients. Such as for example, automatic daily reports, reminders for their activities, important notifications regarding their client activities and actions on the website and more.
We use Celery basically for everything that needs to be scheduled for the future, and using RabbitMQ as our Queue-broker is amazing since it fully integrates with Django and Celery storing on our database results of the tasks done so we can see if anything fails immediately.
I developed one of the largest queue based medical results delivery systems in the world, 18,000+ queues and still growing over a decade later all using MQSeries, later called Websphere MQ. When I left that company I started using RabbitMQ after doing some research on free offerings.. it works brilliantly and is incredibly flexible from small scale single instance use to large scale multi-server - multi-site architectures.
If you can think in queues then RabbitMQ should be a viable solution for integrating disparate systems.
The poster child for scalable messaging systems, RabbitMQ has been used in countless large scale systems as the messaging backbone of any large cluster, and has proven itself time and again in many production settings.
Rabbit acts as our coordinator for all actions that happen during game time. All worker containers connect to rabbit in order to receive game events and emit their own events when applicable.
Used as central Message Broker; off-loading tasks to be executed asynchronous, used as communication tool between different microservices, used as tool to handle peaks in incoming data, etc.
RabbitMQ is the enterprise message bus for our platform, providing infrastructure for managing our ETL queues, real-time event notifications for applications, and audit logging.
RabbitMQ is an all purpose queuing service for our stack. We use it for user facing jobs as well as keeping track of behind the scenes jobs.
Our primary transport mechanism for events. One SNS topic carries a specific event type and n-number of subscribers (usually a Lambda) may subscribe to that event.
Amazon SNS is used for push notification to push notifications of the occurrence of different events during operations of our computing resources on AWS cloud.
We use SNS for platform-agnostic mobile push message handling, essentially to avoid dealing with APNS ourselves.
I mainly use it for the infrastructure notifications and alarms of zerotoherojs.com ’s learning dashboards.