Hutch vs Kafka

Overview

Kafka

Stacks24.2K

Followers22.3K

Votes607

GitHub Stars31.2K

Forks14.8K

Hutch

Stacks7

Followers9

Votes0

Hutch vs Kafka: What are the differences?

Hutch: Inter-Service Communication with RabbitMQ. Hutch is a Ruby library for enabling asynchronous inter-service communication in a service-oriented architecture, using RabbitMQ; Kafka: Distributed, fault tolerant, high throughput pub-sub messaging system. Kafka is a distributed, partitioned, replicated commit log service. It provides the functionality of a messaging system, but with a unique design.

Hutch and Kafka can be primarily classified as "Message Queue" tools.

Some of the features offered by Hutch are:

A simple way to define consumers (queues are automatically created and bound to the exchange with the appropriate binding keys)
An executable and CLI for running consumers (akin to rake resque:work)
Automatic setup of the central exchange

On the other hand, Kafka provides the following key features:

Written at LinkedIn in Scala
Used by LinkedIn to offload processing of all page and other views
Defaults to using persistence, uses OS disk cache for hot data (has higher throughput then any of the above having persistence enabled)

Hutch and Kafka are both open source tools. Kafka with 12.7K GitHub stars and 6.81K forks on GitHub appears to be more popular than Hutch with 712 GitHub stars and 103 GitHub forks.

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 Kafka, Hutch

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

Kirill

GO/C developer at Duckling Sales

Feb 16, 2021

Decided

Maybe not an obvious comparison with Kafka, since Kafka is pretty different from rabbitmq. But for small service, Rabbit as a pubsub platform is super easy to use and pretty powerful. Kafka as an alternative was the original choice, but its really a kind of overkill for a small-medium service. Especially if you are not planning to use k8s, since pure docker deployment can be a pain because of networking setup. Google PubSub was another alternative, its actually pretty cheap, but I never tested it since Rabbit was matching really good for mailing/notification services.

266k views266k

Comments

Ishfaq

Feb 28, 2020

Needs advice

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?

804k views804k

Comments

Detailed Comparison

Kafka	Hutch
Kafka is a distributed, partitioned, replicated commit log service. It provides the functionality of a messaging system, but with a unique design.	Hutch is a Ruby library for enabling asynchronous inter-service communication in a service-oriented architecture, using RabbitMQ.
Written at LinkedIn in Scala;Used by LinkedIn to offload processing of all page and other views;Defaults to using persistence, uses OS disk cache for hot data (has higher throughput then any of the above having persistence enabled);Supports both on-line as off-line processing	A simple way to define consumers (queues are automatically created and bound to the exchange with the appropriate binding keys);An executable and CLI for running consumers (akin to rake resque:work);Automatic setup of the central exchange;Sensible out-of-the-box configuration (e.g. durable messages, persistent queues, message acknowledgements);Management of queue subscriptions;Rails integration;Configurable exception handling
Statistics
GitHub Stars 31.2K	GitHub Stars -
GitHub Forks 14.8K	GitHub Forks -
Stacks 24.2K	Stacks 7
Followers 22.3K	Followers 9
Votes 607	Votes 0
Pros & Cons
Pros 126 High-throughput 119 Distributed 92 Scalable 86 High-Performance 66 Durable Cons 32 Non-Java clients are second-class citizens 29 Needs Zookeeper 9 Operational difficulties 5 Terrible Packaging	No community feedback yet
Integrations
No integrations available	RabbitMQ

What are some alternatives to Kafka, Hutch?

RabbitMQ

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

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.

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.

ActiveMQ

Apache ActiveMQ is fast, supports many Cross Language Clients and Protocols, comes with easy to use Enterprise Integration Patterns and many advanced features while fully supporting JMS 1.1 and J2EE 1.4. Apache ActiveMQ is released under the Apache 2.0 License.

ZeroMQ

The 0MQ lightweight messaging kernel is a library which extends the standard socket interfaces with features traditionally provided by specialised messaging middleware products. 0MQ sockets provide an abstraction of asynchronous message queues, multiple messaging patterns, message filtering (subscriptions), seamless access to multiple transport protocols and more.

Apache NiFi

An easy to use, powerful, and reliable system to process and distribute data. It supports powerful and scalable directed graphs of data routing, transformation, and system mediation logic.

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.

Memphis

Highly scalable and effortless data streaming platform. Made to enable developers and data teams to collaborate and build real-time and streaming apps fast.

IronMQ

An easy-to-use highly available message queuing service. Built for distributed cloud applications with critical messaging needs. Provides on-demand message queuing with advanced features and cloud-optimized performance.

Related Comparisons

Some of the features offered by Hutch are:

A simple way to define consumers (queues are automatically created and bound to the exchange with the appropriate binding keys)
An executable and CLI for running consumers (akin to rake resque:work)
Automatic setup of the central exchange

On the other hand, Kafka provides the following key features:

Written at LinkedIn in Scala
Used by LinkedIn to offload processing of all page and other views
Defaults to using persistence, uses OS disk cache for hot data (has higher throughput then any of the above having persistence enabled)

Hutch and Kafka are both open source tools. Kafka with 12.7K GitHub stars and 6.81K forks on GitHub appears to be more popular than Hutch with 712 GitHub stars and 103 GitHub forks.

Hutch vs Kafka