Google Cloud Pub/Sub vs RabbitMQ

Overview

RabbitMQ

Stacks21.8K

Followers18.9K

Votes558

GitHub Stars13.2K

Forks4.0K

Google Cloud Pub/Sub

Stacks550

Followers428

Votes13

Google Cloud Pub/Sub vs RabbitMQ: What are the differences?

Introduction

In this article, we will discuss the key differences between Google Cloud Pub/Sub and RabbitMQ, two popular messaging systems used for asynchronous communication between applications.

Message Delivery Model: Google Cloud Pub/Sub uses a push-based message delivery model, where messages are automatically pushed to subscribers based on their subscriptions and filters. On the other hand, RabbitMQ uses a pull-based message delivery model, where subscribers need to actively pull messages from the message queue.
Scalability and Availability: Google Cloud Pub/Sub is a fully managed service provided by Google Cloud, which automatically scales to meet the demands of high message throughput and provides high availability with built-in replication and failover mechanisms. In contrast, RabbitMQ requires setting up and managing a cluster of RabbitMQ brokers manually for scalability and availability.
Message Persistence and Durability: In Google Cloud Pub/Sub, messages are automatically persisted and buffered in Google Cloud Storage, providing durability and fault tolerance. RabbitMQ requires explicit configuration for message persistence, and messages are stored on disk within the RabbitMQ server.
Message Ordering: Google Cloud Pub/Sub guarantees at-least-once delivery of messages in the order in which they were published within a single topic, ensuring strict ordering. RabbitMQ can support message ordering, but it requires explicit handling and may introduce some latency compared to Pub/Sub.
Message Acknowledgement: In Google Cloud Pub/Sub, message acknowledgements are handled automatically by the service, ensuring that messages are not reprocessed once they are received and acknowledged. RabbitMQ requires explicit acknowledgement of messages by the consumer, and if not done properly, messages can be redelivered.
Integration with Cloud Services: Google Cloud Pub/Sub seamlessly integrates with other Google Cloud services such as BigQuery, Cloud Storage, and Cloud Functions, making it easier to build and deploy cloud-native applications. RabbitMQ, being a standalone messaging system, does not provide such direct integrations and might require additional effort for integrating with cloud services.

In summary, Google Cloud Pub/Sub and RabbitMQ differ in their message delivery models, scalability and availability features, message persistence and durability mechanisms, message ordering guarantees, handling of message acknowledgements, and integration capabilities with cloud services.

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

Advice on RabbitMQ, Google Cloud Pub/Sub

viradiya

Apr 12, 2020

Needs adviceon

AngularJS

ASP.NET Core

MSSQL

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

André

Technology Manager at GS1 Portugal - Codipor

Jul 30, 2020

Needs adviceon

.NET Core

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 :)

461k views461k

Comments

mediafinger

Feb 13, 2019

Reviewon

Kafka

RabbitMQ

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).

159k views159k

Comments

Detailed Comparison

RabbitMQ	Google Cloud Pub/Sub
RabbitMQ gives your applications a common platform to send and receive messages, and your messages a safe place to live until received.	Cloud Pub/Sub is a fully-managed real-time messaging service that allows you to send and receive messages between independent applications. You can leverage Cloud Pub/Sub’s flexibility to decouple systems and components hosted on Google Cloud Platform or elsewhere on the Internet.
Robust messaging for applications;Easy to use;Runs on all major operating systems;Supports a huge number of developer platforms;Open source and commercially supported	-
Statistics
GitHub Stars 13.2K	GitHub Stars -
GitHub Forks 4.0K	GitHub Forks -
Stacks 21.8K	Stacks 550
Followers 18.9K	Followers 428
Votes 558	Votes 13
Pros & Cons
Pros 235 It's fast and it works with good metrics/monitoring 80 Ease of configuration 60 I like the admin interface 52 Easy to set-up and start with 22 Durable Cons 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	Pros 9 Easy to set-up and start with 2 Efficient and practical for complex systems 2 A great choice for microservice architecture Cons 2 Need integration with stackdriver for monitoring
Integrations
No integrations available	Google Cloud Functions Cloud Functions for Firebase

What are some alternatives to RabbitMQ, Google Cloud Pub/Sub?

Firebase

Firebase is a cloud service designed to power real-time, collaborative applications. Simply add the Firebase library to your application to gain access to a shared data structure; any changes you make to that data are automatically synchronized with the Firebase cloud and with other clients within milliseconds.

Socket.IO

It enables real-time bidirectional event-based communication. It works on every platform, browser or device, focusing equally on reliability and speed.

Kafka

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

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.

PubNub

PubNub makes it easy for you to add real-time capabilities to your apps, without worrying about the infrastructure. Build apps that allow your users to engage in real-time across mobile, browser, desktop and server.

Pusher

Pusher is the category leader in delightful APIs for app developers building communication and collaboration features.

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.

SignalR

SignalR allows bi-directional communication between server and client. Servers can now push content to connected clients instantly as it becomes available. SignalR supports Web Sockets, and falls back to other compatible techniques for older browsers. SignalR includes APIs for connection management (for instance, connect and disconnect events), grouping connections, and authorization.

Ably

Ably offers WebSockets, stream resume, history, presence, and managed third-party integrations to make it simple to build, extend, and deliver digital realtime experiences at scale.

Related Comparisons

Google Cloud Pub/Sub vs RabbitMQ: What are the differences?

Introduction

In this article, we will discuss the key differences between Google Cloud Pub/Sub and RabbitMQ, two popular messaging systems used for asynchronous communication between applications.

Message Delivery Model: Google Cloud Pub/Sub uses a push-based message delivery model, where messages are automatically pushed to subscribers based on their subscriptions and filters. On the other hand, RabbitMQ uses a pull-based message delivery model, where subscribers need to actively pull messages from the message queue.
Scalability and Availability: Google Cloud Pub/Sub is a fully managed service provided by Google Cloud, which automatically scales to meet the demands of high message throughput and provides high availability with built-in replication and failover mechanisms. In contrast, RabbitMQ requires setting up and managing a cluster of RabbitMQ brokers manually for scalability and availability.
Message Persistence and Durability: In Google Cloud Pub/Sub, messages are automatically persisted and buffered in Google Cloud Storage, providing durability and fault tolerance. RabbitMQ requires explicit configuration for message persistence, and messages are stored on disk within the RabbitMQ server.
Message Ordering: Google Cloud Pub/Sub guarantees at-least-once delivery of messages in the order in which they were published within a single topic, ensuring strict ordering. RabbitMQ can support message ordering, but it requires explicit handling and may introduce some latency compared to Pub/Sub.
Message Acknowledgement: In Google Cloud Pub/Sub, message acknowledgements are handled automatically by the service, ensuring that messages are not reprocessed once they are received and acknowledged. RabbitMQ requires explicit acknowledgement of messages by the consumer, and if not done properly, messages can be redelivered.
Integration with Cloud Services: Google Cloud Pub/Sub seamlessly integrates with other Google Cloud services such as BigQuery, Cloud Storage, and Cloud Functions, making it easier to build and deploy cloud-native applications. RabbitMQ, being a standalone messaging system, does not provide such direct integrations and might require additional effort for integrating with cloud services.

Google Cloud Pub/Sub vs RabbitMQ

Overview

Google Cloud Pub/Sub vs RabbitMQ: What are the differences?