Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
ZeroMQ vs pg-amqp-bridge: What are the differences?
# ZeroMQ vs pg-amqp-bridge
ZeroMQ and pg-amqp-bridge are two popular messaging libraries used for communication between different components of a system. Here are the key differences between ZeroMQ and pg-amqp-bridge:
1. **Transport Protocol**: ZeroMQ uses its own transport protocols for messaging, while pg-amqp-bridge specifically supports the AMQP (Advanced Message Queuing Protocol) standard.
2. **Database Integration**: pg-amqp-bridge is designed for integrating Postgres databases with messaging queues, while ZeroMQ is a more general-purpose messaging library that can be used in a variety of applications.
3. **Official Support**: ZeroMQ is maintained by a community-driven organization, while pg-amqp-bridge is officially supported by the team behind Postgres.
4. **Complexity**: ZeroMQ is known for its simplicity and ease of use, making it ideal for straightforward messaging scenarios. On the other hand, pg-amqp-bridge may have more complexity due to its specific focus on Postgres integration.
5. **Scalability**: ZeroMQ is highly scalable and allows for building distributed systems with minimal effort, whereas pg-amqp-bridge may have limitations in scalability depending on the workload and the database used.
6. **Performance**: In terms of performance, ZeroMQ is generally faster due to its lightweight nature and direct communication approach, while pg-amqp-bridge may introduce additional overhead due to the AMQP protocol and database integration.
In Summary, ZeroMQ and pg-amqp-bridge differ in their transport protocols, database integration, official support, complexity, scalability, and performance characteristics.
Hi, we are in a ZMQ set up in a push/pull pattern, and we currently start to have more traffic and cases that the service is unavailable or stuck. We want to: * Not loose messages in services outages * Safely restart service without losing messages (ZeroMQ seems to need to close the socket in the receiver before restart manually)
Do you have experience with this setup with ZeroMQ? Would you suggest RabbitMQ or Amazon SQS (we are in AWS setup) instead? Something else?
Thank you for your time
ZeroMQ is fast but you need to build build reliability yourself. There are a number of patterns described in the zeromq guide. I have used RabbitMQ before which gives lot of functionality out of the box, you can probably use the worker queues
example from the tutorial, it can also persists messages in the queue.
I haven't used Amazon SQS before. Another tool you could use is Kafka.
Both would do the trick, but there are some nuances. We work with both.
From the sound of it, your main focus is "not losing messages". In that case, I would go with RabbitMQ with a high availability policy (ha-mode=all) and a main/retry/error queue pattern.
Push messages to an exchange, which sends them to the main queue. If an error occurs, push the errored out message to the retry exchange, which forwards it to the retry queue. Give the retry queue a x-message-ttl and set the main exchange as a dead-letter-exchange. If your message has been retried several times, push it to the error exchange, where the message can remain until someone has time to look at it.
This is a very useful and resilient pattern that allows you to never lose messages. With the high availability policy, you make sure that if one of your rabbitmq nodes dies, another can take over and messages are already mirrored to it.
This is not really possible with SQS, because SQS is a lot more focused on throughput and scaling. Combined with SNS it can do interesting things like deduplication of messages and such. That said, one thing core to its design is that messages have a maximum retention time. The idea is that a message that has stayed in an SQS queue for a while serves no more purpose after a while, so it gets removed - so as to not block up any listener resources for a long time. You can also set up a DLQ here, but these similarly do not hold onto messages forever. Since you seem to depend on messages surviving at all cost, I would suggest that the scaling/throughput benefit of SQS does not outweigh the difference in approach to messages there.
Pros of pg-amqp-bridge
Pros of ZeroMQ
- Fast23
- Lightweight20
- Transport agnostic11
- No broker required7
- Low level APIs are in C4
- Low latency4
- Open source1
- Publish-Subscribe1
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of pg-amqp-bridge
Cons of ZeroMQ
- No message durability5
- Not a very reliable system - message delivery wise3
- M x N problem with M producers and N consumers1