Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

Beanstalkd

106
129
+ 1
74
RabbitMQ

14.8K
12.9K
+ 1
518
Add tool

Beanstalkd vs RabbitMQ: What are the differences?

Beanstalkd: A simple, fast work queue. Beanstalks's interface is generic, but was originally designed for reducing the latency of page views in high-volume web applications by running time-consuming tasks asynchronously; 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.

Beanstalkd belongs to "Background Processing" category of the tech stack, while RabbitMQ can be primarily classified under "Message Queue".

"Fast" is the primary reason why developers consider Beanstalkd over the competitors, whereas "It's fast and it works with good metrics/monitoring" was stated as the key factor in picking RabbitMQ.

Beanstalkd and RabbitMQ are both open source tools. RabbitMQ with 5.88K GitHub stars and 1.73K forks on GitHub appears to be more popular than Beanstalkd with 5.09K GitHub stars and 750 GitHub forks.

reddit, MIT, and SendGrid are some of the popular companies that use RabbitMQ, whereas Beanstalkd is used by Douban, Rollbar, and Achieved. RabbitMQ has a broader approval, being mentioned in 921 company stacks & 532 developers stacks; compared to Beanstalkd, which is listed in 27 company stacks and 8 developer stacks.

Advice on Beanstalkd and RabbitMQ
Pulkit Sapra
Needs advice
on
RabbitMQRabbitMQKubernetesKubernetes
and
Amazon SQSAmazon SQS

Hi! I am creating a scraping system in Django, which involves long running tasks between 1 minute & 1 Day. As I am new to Message Brokers and Task Queues, I need advice on which architecture to use for my system. ( Amazon SQS, RabbitMQ, or Celery). The system should be autoscalable using Kubernetes(K8) based on the number of pending tasks in the queue.

See more
Replies (1)
Anis Zehani
Recommends
KafkaKafka

Hello, i highly recommend Apache Kafka, to me it's the best. You can deploy it in cluster mode inside K8S, thus you can have a Highly available system (also auto scalable).

Good luck

See more
Needs advice
on
RabbitMQRabbitMQ
and
CeleryCelery

I am just a beginner at these two technologies.

Problem statement: I am getting lakh of users from the sequel server for whom I need to create caches in MongoDB by making different REST API requests.

Here these users can be treated as messages. Each REST API request is a task.

I am confused about whether I should go for RabbitMQ alone or Celery.

If I have to go with RabbitMQ, I prefer to use python with Pika module. But the challenge with Pika is, it is not thread-safe. So I am not finding a way to execute a lakh of API requests in parallel using multiple threads using Pika.

If I have to go with Celery, I don't know how I can achieve better scalability in executing these API requests in parallel.

See more
Replies (1)
Recommends
RedisRedisrqrq

For large amounts of small tasks and caches I have had good luck with Redis and RQ. I have not personally used celery but I am fairly sure it would scale well, and I have not used RabbitMQ for anything besides communication between services. If you prefer python my suggestions should feel comfortable.

Sorry I do not have a more information

See more
Meili Triantafyllidi
Software engineer at Digital Science · | 5 upvotes · 171.7K views
Needs advice
on
ZeroMQZeroMQRabbitMQRabbitMQ
and
Amazon SQSAmazon SQS

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

See more
Replies (2)
Shishir Pandey
Recommends
RabbitMQRabbitMQ

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.

See more
Kevin Deyne
Principal Software Engineer at Accurate Background · | 4 upvotes · 24 views
Recommends
RabbitMQRabbitMQ

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.

See more
André Almeida
Technology Manager at GS1 Portugal - Codipor · | 5 upvotes · 164K views
Needs advice
on
RabbitMQRabbitMQ
and
Azure Service BusAzure Service Bus

Hello dear developers, our company is starting a new project for a new Web App, and we are currently designing the Architecture (we will be using .NET Core). We want to embark on something new, so we are thinking about migrating from a monolithic perspective to a microservices perspective. We wish to containerize those microservices and make them independent from each other. Is it the best way for microservices to communicate with each other via ESB, or is there a new way of doing this? Maybe complementing with an API Gateway? Can you recommend something else different than the two tools I provided?

We want something good for Cost/Benefit; performance should be high too (but not the primary constraint).

Thank you very much in advance :)

See more
Replies (2)

A Pro of Azure Service Bus is reliability and persistence: you can send message when receiver is offline; receiver can read it when it back online. A Cons is costs and message size. You can consider also SignalR

See more
Recommends

There are many different messaging frameworks available for IPC use. It's not really a question of how "new" the technology is, but what you need it to do. Azure Service Bus can be a great service to use, but it can also take a lot of effort to administrate and maintain that can make it costly to use unless you need the more advanced features it offers for routing, sequencing, delivery, etc. I would recommend checking out this link to get a basic idea of different messaging architectures. These only cover Azure services, but there are many other solutions that use similar architectural models.

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/event-grid/compare-messaging-services

See more
Needs advice
on
RedisRedisRabbitMQRabbitMQ
and
KafkaKafka

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.

See more
Replies (4)
Maheedhar Aluri
Recommends
KafkaKafka

Kafka is an Enterprise Messaging Framework whereas Redis is an Enterprise Cache Broker, in-memory database and high performance database.Both are having their own advantages, but they are different in usage and implementation. Now if you are creating microservices check the user consumption volumes, its generating logs, scalability, systems to be integrated and so on. I feel for your scenario initially you can go with KAFKA bu as the throughput, consumption and other factors are scaling then gradually you can add Redis accordingly.

See more
Recommends
Angular 2Angular 2

I first recommend that you choose Angular over AngularJS if you are starting something new. AngularJs is no longer getting enhancements, but perhaps you meant Angular. Regarding microservices, I recommend considering microservices when you have different development teams for each service that may want to use different programming languages and backend data stores. If it is all the same team, same code language, and same data store I would not use microservices. I might use a message queue, in which case RabbitMQ is a good one. But you may also be able to simply write your own in which you write a record in a table in MSSQL and one of your services reads the record from the table and processes it. The most challenging part of doing it yourself is writing a service that does a good job of reading the queue without reading the same message multiple times or missing a message; and that is where RabbitMQ can help.

See more
Recommends
NATSNATS

We found that the CNCF landscape is a good advisor when working going into the cloud / microservices space: https://landscape.cncf.io/fullscreen=yes. When choosing a technology one important criteria to me is if it is cloud native or not. Neither Redis, RabbitMQ nor Kafka is cloud native. The try to adapt but will be replaced eventually with technologies that are cloud native.

We have gone with NATS and have never looked back. We haven't spend a single minute on server maintainance in the last year and the setup of a cluster is way too easy. With the new features NATS incorporates now (and the ones still on the roadmap) it is already and will be sooo much mure than Redis, RabbitMQ and Kafka are. It can replace service discovery, load balancing, global multiclusters and failover, etc, etc.

Your thought might be: But I don't need all of that! Well, at the same time it is much more leightweight than Redis, RabbitMQ and especially Kafka.

See more
Amit Mor
Software Architect at Payoneer · | 3 upvotes · 315.2K views
Recommends
KafkaKafka

I think something is missing here and you should consider answering it to yourself. You are building a couple of services. Why are you considering event-sourcing architecture using Message Brokers such as the above? Won't a simple REST service based arch suffice? Read about CQRS and the problems it entails (state vs command impedance for example). Do you need Pub/Sub or Push/Pull? Is queuing of messages enough or would you need querying or filtering of messages before consumption? Also, someone would have to manage these brokers (unless using managed, cloud provider based solution), automate their deployment, someone would need to take care of backups, clustering if needed, disaster recovery, etc. I have a good past experience in terms of manageability/devops of the above options with Kafka and Redis, not so much with RabbitMQ. Both are very performant. But also note that Redis is not a pure message broker (at time of writing) but more of a general purpose in-memory key-value store. Kafka nowadays is much more than a distributed message broker. Long story short. In my taste, you should go with a minialistic approach and try to avoid either of them if you can, especially if your architecture does not fall nicely into event sourcing. If not I'd examine Kafka. If you need more capabilities than I'd consider Redis and use it for all sorts of other things such as a cache.

See more
Needs advice
on
RabbitMQRabbitMQ
and
KafkaKafka

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?

See more
Replies (4)
Tarun Batra
Back End Developer at instabox · | 7 upvotes · 270.1K views
Recommends
RabbitMQRabbitMQ

RabbitMQ is great for queuing and retrying. You can send the requests to your backend which will further queue these requests in RabbitMQ (or Kafka, too). The consumer on the other end can take care of processing . For a detailed analysis, check this blog about choosing between Kafka and RabbitMQ.

See more
Trevor Rydalch
Software Engineer at InsideSales.com · | 6 upvotes · 270.1K views
Recommends
RabbitMQRabbitMQ

Well, first off, it's good practice to do as little non-UI work on the foreground thread as possible, regardless of whether the requests take a long time. You don't want the UI thread blocked.

This sounds like a good use case for RabbitMQ. Primarily because you don't need each message processed by more than one consumer. If you wanted to process a single message more than once (say for different purposes), then Apache Kafka would be a much better fit as you can have multiple consumer groups consuming from the same topics independently.

Have your API publish messages containing the data necessary for the third-party request to a Rabbit queue and have consumers reading off there. If it fails, you can either retry immediately, or publish to a deadletter queue where you can reprocess them whenever you want (shovel them back into the regular queue).

See more
Guillaume Maka
Full Stack Web Developer · | 2 upvotes · 269.5K views
Recommends
RabbitMQRabbitMQ

As far as I understand, Kafka is a like a persisted event state manager where you can plugin various source of data and transform/query them as event via a stream API. Regarding your use case I will consider using RabbitMQ if your intent is to implement service inter-communication kind of thing. RabbitMQ is a good choice for one-one publisher/subscriber (or consumer) and I think you can also have multiple consumers by configuring a fanout exchange. RabbitMQ provide also message retries, message cancellation, durable queue, message requeue, message ACK....

See more
Recommends
RabbitMQRabbitMQ

In my opinion RabbitMQ fits better in your case because you don’t have order in queue. You can process your messages in any order. You don’t need to store the data what you sent. Kafka is a persistent storage like the blockchain. RabbitMQ is a message broker. Kafka is not a good solution for the system with confirmations of the messages delivery.

See more
Needs advice
on
RedisRedisRabbitMQRabbitMQ
and
KafkaKafka

Hello! [Client sends live video frames -> Server computes and responds the result] Web clients send video frames from their webcam then on the back we need to run them through some algorithm and send the result back as a response. Since everything will need to work in a live mode, we want something fast and also suitable for our case (as everyone needs). Currently, we are considering RabbitMQ for the purpose, but recently I have noticed that there is Redis and Kafka too. Could you please help us choose among them or anything more suitable beyond these guys. I think something similar to our product would be people using their webcam to get Snapchat masks on their faces, and the calculated face points are responded on from the server, then the client-side draw the mask on the user's face. I hope this helps. Thank you!

See more
Replies (3)
Jordi Martínez
Senior software architect at Bootloader · | 3 upvotes · 220.6K views
Recommends
KafkaKafka

For your use case, the tool that fits more is definitely Kafka. RabbitMQ was not invented to handle data streams, but messages. Plenty of them, of course, but individual messages. Redis is an in-memory database, which is what makes it so fast. Redis recently included features to handle data stream, but it cannot best Kafka on this, or at least not yet. Kafka is not also super fast, it also provides lots of features to help create software to handle those streams.

See more
Recommends
RabbitMQRabbitMQ

For this kind of use case I would recommend either RabbitMQ or Kafka depending on the needs for scaling, redundancy and how you want to design it.

Kafka's true value comes into play when you need to distribute the streaming load over lot's of resources. If you were passing the video frames directly into the queue then you'd probably want to go with Kafka however if you can just pass a pointer to the frames then RabbitMQ should be fine and will be much simpler to run.

Bear in mind too that Kafka is a persistent log, not just a message bus so any data you feed into it is kept available until it expires (which is configurable). This can be useful if you have multiple clients reading from the queue with their own lifecycle but in your case it doesn't sound like that would be necessary. You could also use a RabbitMQ fanout exchange if you need that in the future.

See more
Recommends
RabbitMQRabbitMQ

I've used all of them and Kafka is hard to set up and maintain. Mostly is a Java dinosaur that you can set up and. I've used it with Storm but that is another big dinosaur. Redis is mostly for caching. The queue mechanism is not very scalable for multiple processors. Depending on the speed you need to implement on the reliability I would use RabbitMQ. You can store the frames(if they are too big) somewhere else and just have a link to them. Moving data through any of these will increase cost of transportation. With Rabbit, you can always have multiple consumers and check for redundancy. Hope it clears out your thoughts!

See more
Decisions about Beanstalkd and RabbitMQ
Mickael Alliel
DevOps Engineer at Rookout · | 4 upvotes · 228.5K views

In addition to being a lot cheaper, Google Cloud Pub/Sub allowed us to not worry about maintaining any more infrastructure that needed.

We moved from a self-hosted RabbitMQ over to CloudAMQP and decided that since we use GCP anyway, why not try their managed PubSub?

It is one of the better decisions that we made, and we can just focus about building more important stuff!

See more
Get Advice from developers at your company using Private StackShare. Sign up for Private StackShare.
Learn More
Pros of Beanstalkd
Pros of RabbitMQ
  • 23
    Fast
  • 12
    Free
  • 12
    Does one thing well
  • 9
    Scalability
  • 8
    Simplicity
  • 3
    External admin UI developer friendly
  • 3
    Job delay
  • 2
    Job prioritization
  • 2
    External admin UI
  • 229
    It's fast and it works with good metrics/monitoring
  • 79
    Ease of configuration
  • 58
    I like the admin interface
  • 50
    Easy to set-up and start with
  • 20
    Durable
  • 18
    Intuitive work through python
  • 18
    Standard protocols
  • 10
    Written primarily in Erlang
  • 8
    Simply superb
  • 6
    Completeness of messaging patterns
  • 3
    Scales to 1 million messages per second
  • 3
    Reliable
  • 2
    Better than most traditional queue based message broker
  • 2
    Distributed
  • 2
    Supports AMQP
  • 1
    Inubit Integration
  • 1
    Supports MQTT
  • 1
    Runs on Open Telecom Platform
  • 1
    High performance
  • 1
    Reliability
  • 1
    Clusterable
  • 1
    Clear documentation with different scripting language
  • 1
    Great ui
  • 1
    Better routing system
  • 1
    Delayed messages

Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions

Cons of Beanstalkd
Cons of RabbitMQ
    Be the first to leave a con
    • 9
      Too complicated cluster/HA config and management
    • 6
      Needs Erlang runtime. Need ops good with Erlang runtime
    • 5
      Configuration must be done first, not by your code
    • 4
      Slow

    Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions

    What is Beanstalkd?

    Beanstalks's interface is generic, but was originally designed for reducing the latency of page views in high-volume web applications by running time-consuming tasks asynchronously.

    What is RabbitMQ?

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

    Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

    What companies use Beanstalkd?
    What companies use RabbitMQ?
    See which teams inside your own company are using Beanstalkd or RabbitMQ.
    Sign up for Private StackShareLearn More

    Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions

    What tools integrate with Beanstalkd?
    What tools integrate with RabbitMQ?
      No integrations found

      Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions

      Blog Posts

      GitHubPythonNode.js+47
      50
      69464
      GitHubGitDocker+34
      29
      40813
      JavaScriptGitHubPython+42
      52
      19916
      GitHubPythonSlack+25
      7
      2840
      GitHubPythonDocker+24
      13
      16746
      GitHubSlackMySQL+44
      109
      49990
      What are some alternatives to Beanstalkd and RabbitMQ?
      Redis
      Redis is an open source, BSD licensed, advanced key-value store. It is often referred to as a data structure server since keys can contain strings, hashes, lists, sets and sorted sets.
      Resque
      Background jobs can be any Ruby class or module that responds to perform. Your existing classes can easily be converted to background jobs or you can create new classes specifically to do work. Or, you can do both.
      Kafka
      Kafka is a distributed, partitioned, replicated commit log service. It provides the functionality of a messaging system, but with a unique design.
      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.
      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.
      See all alternatives