Apache Pulsar vs XMPP

Overview

XMPP

Stacks71

Followers138

Votes0

Apache Pulsar

Stacks119

Followers199

Votes24

Apache Pulsar vs XMPP: What are the differences?

Architecture: Apache Pulsar is a distributed messaging system that is designed for a cloud-native environment with a highly scalable and flexible architecture. In contrast, XMPP (Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol) is an open-source protocol primarily used for instant messaging and presence information exchange in a client-server model.
Message Queuing vs. Instant Messaging: Apache Pulsar focuses on message queuing and streaming, providing features like publish-subscribe, message retention, and guaranteed message delivery. On the other hand, XMPP is more tailored towards instant messaging applications, supporting features like chat, presence notifications, and roster management.
Scalability: Apache Pulsar is built to easily scale horizontally across a cluster of brokers, allowing for seamless expansion and load distribution. XMPP, while capable of scaling to a certain extent, may face challenges in scaling efficiently to handle increased traffic and user load.
Use Cases: Apache Pulsar is commonly used for real-time data processing, event streaming, and log aggregation in Big Data environments. XMPP, on the other hand, is popularly used in instant messaging platforms, social networking applications, and collaboration tools requiring real-time communication.
Protocol Support: Apache Pulsar supports multiple messaging protocols like MQTT, STOMP, and WebSocket, providing versatility in communication channels. In contrast, XMPP relies on its own protocol for communication and interoperability, limiting the options for integrating with other protocols.
Community and Ecosystem: Apache Pulsar has a growing community and ecosystem with active contributors and a supportive community that continuously enhances the platform. XMPP also has a solid community base but may not be as rapidly evolving or versatile in terms of ecosystem offerings compared to Apache Pulsar.

In Summary, Apache Pulsar and XMPP differ in architecture, focus areas, scalability, use cases, protocol support, and community ecosystems, catering to distinct messaging needs in diverse applications.

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)

Manual

Detailed Comparison

XMPP	Apache Pulsar
It is a set of open technologies for instant messaging, presence, multi-party chat, voice and video calls, collaboration, lightweight middleware, content syndication, and generalized routing of XML data.	Apache Pulsar is a distributed messaging solution developed and released to open source at Yahoo. Pulsar supports both pub-sub messaging and queuing in a platform designed for performance, scalability, and ease of development and operation.
-	Unified model supporting pub-sub messaging and queuing; Easy scalability to millions of topics; Native multi-datacenter replication; Multi-language client API; Guaranteed data durability; Scalable distributed storage leveraging Apache BookKeeper
Statistics
Stacks 71	Stacks 119
Followers 138	Followers 199
Votes 0	Votes 24
Pros & Cons
No community feedback yet	Pros 7 Simple 4 Scalable 3 High-throughput 2 Geo-replication 2 Multi-tenancy Cons 1 Not jms compliant 1 No guaranteed dliefvery 1 No one and only one delivery 1 LImited Language support(6) 1 Very few commercial vendors for support
Integrations
Java Python JavaScript	No integrations available

What are some alternatives to XMPP, Apache Pulsar?

Kubernetes

Kubernetes is an open source orchestration system for Docker containers. It handles scheduling onto nodes in a compute cluster and actively manages workloads to ensure that their state matches the users declared intentions.

Rancher

Rancher is an open source container management platform that includes full distributions of Kubernetes, Apache Mesos and Docker Swarm, and makes it simple to operate container clusters on any cloud or infrastructure platform.

Kafka

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

RabbitMQ

RabbitMQ gives your applications a common platform to send and receive messages, and your messages a safe place to live until received.

Docker Compose

With Compose, you define a multi-container application in a single file, then spin your application up in a single command which does everything that needs to be done to get it running.

Docker Swarm

Swarm serves the standard Docker API, so any tool which already communicates with a Docker daemon can use Swarm to transparently scale to multiple hosts: Dokku, Compose, Krane, Deis, DockerUI, Shipyard, Drone, Jenkins... and, of course, the Docker client itself.

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.

Tutum

Tutum lets developers easily manage and run lightweight, portable, self-sufficient containers from any application. AWS-like control, Heroku-like ease. The same container that a developer builds and tests on a laptop can run at scale in Tutum.

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 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.

Related Comparisons

Apache Pulsar vs XMPP: What are the differences?

Architecture: Apache Pulsar is a distributed messaging system that is designed for a cloud-native environment with a highly scalable and flexible architecture. In contrast, XMPP (Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol) is an open-source protocol primarily used for instant messaging and presence information exchange in a client-server model.
Message Queuing vs. Instant Messaging: Apache Pulsar focuses on message queuing and streaming, providing features like publish-subscribe, message retention, and guaranteed message delivery. On the other hand, XMPP is more tailored towards instant messaging applications, supporting features like chat, presence notifications, and roster management.
Scalability: Apache Pulsar is built to easily scale horizontally across a cluster of brokers, allowing for seamless expansion and load distribution. XMPP, while capable of scaling to a certain extent, may face challenges in scaling efficiently to handle increased traffic and user load.
Use Cases: Apache Pulsar is commonly used for real-time data processing, event streaming, and log aggregation in Big Data environments. XMPP, on the other hand, is popularly used in instant messaging platforms, social networking applications, and collaboration tools requiring real-time communication.
Protocol Support: Apache Pulsar supports multiple messaging protocols like MQTT, STOMP, and WebSocket, providing versatility in communication channels. In contrast, XMPP relies on its own protocol for communication and interoperability, limiting the options for integrating with other protocols.
Community and Ecosystem: Apache Pulsar has a growing community and ecosystem with active contributors and a supportive community that continuously enhances the platform. XMPP also has a solid community base but may not be as rapidly evolving or versatile in terms of ecosystem offerings compared to Apache Pulsar.

Apache Pulsar vs XMPP

Overview