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. Apache Beam vs Kafka

Apache Beam vs Kafka

OverviewDecisionsComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Kafka
Kafka
Stacks24.2K
Followers22.3K
Votes607
GitHub Stars31.2K
Forks14.8K
Apache Beam
Apache Beam
Stacks183
Followers361
Votes14

Apache Beam vs Kafka: What are the differences?

Introduction

Apache Beam and Kafka are two popular technologies used in data processing and stream processing. While they have some similarities, they also have key differences that set them apart.

  1. Data Processing Paradigm: Apache Beam is a unified programming model for both batch and stream processing. It allows developers to write a single pipeline that works across various execution engines. On the other hand, Kafka is a distributed streaming platform that provides a pub-sub messaging system. It enables real-time stream processing by allowing producers to publish data to topics and consumers to subscribe to those topics.

  2. Processing Semantics: Apache Beam provides strong processing semantics by supporting windowing, event time, and watermarking. Developers can perform complex operations like grouping data within time windows or handling late data. In contrast, Kafka provides a simple publish-subscribe model without built-in support for complex processing semantics. It focuses on high throughput and fault-tolerance rather than complex calculations or time-based operations.

  3. Data Storage: Apache Beam is designed to work with various data storage systems, including both batch and stream-oriented ones. It allows developers to easily integrate with databases, cloud storage, and other data processing tools. Kafka, on the other hand, is more focused on the stream processing aspect and does not provide built-in data storage capabilities. It relies on external systems for persistent storage and data retention.

  4. Data Durability: Apache Beam ensures data durability by supporting fault-tolerance mechanisms like data replication and checkpointing. It provides guarantees that data will not be lost during processing failures. Kafka is also designed for fault-tolerance and data durability. It stores the data in durable storage and provides replication across multiple brokers to ensure high availability.

  5. Processing Latency: Apache Beam provides low-latency processing capabilities, allowing near real-time data processing. It achieves this by optimizing the pipeline and execution engine. Kafka, being a distributed streaming platform, also offers low-latency message delivery. However, the overall processing latency depends on factors like network latency and consumer processing time.

  6. Ecosystem and Integration: Apache Beam has a wide ecosystem and supports integration with various big data tools and frameworks. It can be used with Apache Hadoop, Apache Flink, Apache Spark, and other popular processing engines. Kafka, on the other hand, has a focused ecosystem around stream processing and real-time analytics. It integrates well with tools like Apache Storm, Apache Samza, and Kafka Connect.

In Summary, Apache Beam is a unified programming model for both batch and stream processing, providing strong processing semantics, various data storage integrations, and low-latency processing. Kafka, on the other hand, is a distributed streaming platform focused on pub-sub messaging, fault-tolerant data storage, and low-latency message delivery.

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, Apache Beam

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)
10.9k views10.9k
Comments

Detailed Comparison

Kafka
Kafka
Apache Beam
Apache Beam

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

It implements batch and streaming data processing jobs that run on any execution engine. It executes pipelines on multiple execution environments.

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
-
Statistics
GitHub Stars
31.2K
GitHub Stars
-
GitHub Forks
14.8K
GitHub Forks
-
Stacks
24.2K
Stacks
183
Followers
22.3K
Followers
361
Votes
607
Votes
14
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
  • 5
    Open-source
  • 5
    Cross-platform
  • 2
    Unified batch and stream processing
  • 2
    Portable

What are some alternatives to Kafka, Apache Beam?

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.

Airflow

Airflow

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.

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.

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