Cassandra vs RabbitMQ: What are the differences?
Cassandra: A partitioned row store. Rows are organized into tables with a required primary key. Partitioning means that Cassandra can distribute your data across multiple machines in an application-transparent matter. Cassandra will automatically repartition as machines are added and removed from the cluster. Row store means that like relational databases, Cassandra organizes data by rows and columns. The Cassandra Query Language (CQL) is a close relative of SQL; 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.
Cassandra belongs to "Databases" category of the tech stack, while RabbitMQ can be primarily classified under "Message Queue".
"Distributed" is the primary reason why developers consider Cassandra over the competitors, whereas "It's fast and it works with good metrics/monitoring" was stated as the key factor in picking RabbitMQ.
Cassandra and RabbitMQ are both open source tools. It seems that RabbitMQ with 5.95K GitHub stars and 1.78K forks on GitHub has more adoption than Cassandra with 5.27K GitHub stars and 2.35K GitHub forks.
reddit, 9GAG, and Rainist are some of the popular companies that use RabbitMQ, whereas Cassandra is used by Uber Technologies, Facebook, and Spotify. RabbitMQ has a broader approval, being mentioned in 940 company stacks & 548 developers stacks; compared to Cassandra, which is listed in 342 company stacks and 240 developer stacks.
What is Cassandra?
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 Cassandra?
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.
Beamery runs a #microservices architecture in the backend on top of Google Cloud with Kubernetes There are a 100+ different microservice split between Node.js and Go . Data flows between the microservices over REST and gRPC and passes through Kafka RabbitMQ as a message bus. Beamery stores data in MongoDB with near-realtime replication to Elasticsearch . In addition, Beamery uses Redis for various memory-optimized tasks.
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.
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.
Stitch is a wrapper around a Cassandra database. It has a web application that provides read-access to the counts through an HTTP API. The counts are written to Cassandra in two distinct ways, and it's possible to use either or both of them:
Real-time: For real-time updates, Stitch has a processor application that handles a stream of events coming from a broker and increments the appropriate counts in Cassandra.
Batch: The batch part is a MapReduce job running on Hadoop that reads event logs, calculates the overall totals, and bulk loads this into Cassandra.
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.
Cassandra is our data management workhorse. It handles all our key-value services, supports time-series data storage and retrieval, securely stores all our audit trails, and backs our Datomic database.
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.
While we experimented with Cassandra in the past, we are no longer using it. It is, however, open for consideration in future projects.
We are using Cassandra in a few of our apps. One of them is as a count service application to track the number of shares, clicks.. etc