StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. Utilities
  3. Background Jobs
  4. Message Queue
  5. Hutch vs RabbitMQ

Hutch vs RabbitMQ

OverviewDecisionsComparisonAlternatives

Overview

RabbitMQ
RabbitMQ
Stacks21.8K
Followers18.9K
Votes558
GitHub Stars13.2K
Forks4.0K
Hutch
Hutch
Stacks7
Followers9
Votes0

Hutch vs RabbitMQ: What are the differences?

Introduction

In this article, we will explore the key differences between Hutch and RabbitMQ.

  1. Scalability: Hutch is a horizontally scalable job queue system that is built on top of RabbitMQ. It allows you to distribute jobs across multiple workers, facilitating concurrency and high throughput. On the other hand, RabbitMQ is a message broker that supports multiple messaging patterns, including publish/subscribe and point-to-point communication. It provides scalability by allowing multiple clients to connect to it and exchange messages.

  2. Flexibility: Hutch provides a higher-level abstraction for managing jobs. It allows you to define jobs as Ruby classes and provides a Ruby DSL for configuring various job-related settings. RabbitMQ, on the other hand, is a general-purpose message broker that can be used with different programming languages and frameworks. It offers more flexibility in terms of language choice and integration options.

  3. Reliability: Hutch leverages RabbitMQ's message durability features to ensure reliable job processing. It persists messages to disk, providing durability in case of failures. RabbitMQ also provides message durability by default, ensuring that messages are not lost even if the broker goes down temporarily. Additionally, RabbitMQ offers various advanced features like message acknowledgments and routing policies to enhance reliability in different scenarios.

  4. Ease of Use: Hutch simplifies the process of working with RabbitMQ by providing a higher-level API and conventions for managing jobs. It abstracts away the complexities of interacting with RabbitMQ directly, making it easier to get started with job processing. RabbitMQ, on the other hand, requires a deeper understanding of messaging concepts and configuration options, which may require more effort to set up and maintain.

  5. Monitoring and Management: Hutch provides built-in monitoring and management tools that allow you to monitor the state of your jobs, track their progress, and troubleshoot issues. It offers a web interface and a command-line interface for managing jobs and inspecting job queues. RabbitMQ, on the other hand, provides its own web-based management interface that allows you to monitor exchanges, queues, and connections. It also supports integration with third-party monitoring tools.

  6. Community and Ecosystem: RabbitMQ has a larger and more mature community compared to Hutch. It has been widely adopted and is backed by a strong ecosystem of third-party tools and libraries. This larger community ensures better support, documentation, and resources for troubleshooting and learning. Hutch, being built on top of RabbitMQ, benefits from this active community and can leverage the ecosystem of RabbitMQ plugins and integrations.

In summary, Hutch provides a higher-level abstraction for managing jobs on top of RabbitMQ, offering scalability, flexibility, reliability, ease of use, monitoring, and management features. RabbitMQ is a general-purpose message broker that offers more flexibility in terms of language choice and integration options, along with its own set of features for reliability, monitoring, and management.

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)
or
Manual

Advice on RabbitMQ, Hutch

viradiya
viradiya

Apr 12, 2020

Needs adviceonAngularJSAngularJSASP.NET CoreASP.NET CoreMSSQLMSSQL

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
Pulkit
Pulkit

Software Engineer

Oct 30, 2020

Needs adviceonDjangoDjangoAmazon SQSAmazon SQSRabbitMQRabbitMQ

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.

474k views474k
Comments
Kirill
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

Detailed Comparison

RabbitMQ
RabbitMQ
Hutch
Hutch

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

Hutch is a Ruby library for enabling asynchronous inter-service communication in a service-oriented architecture, using RabbitMQ.

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
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
13.2K
GitHub Stars
-
GitHub Forks
4.0K
GitHub Forks
-
Stacks
21.8K
Stacks
7
Followers
18.9K
Followers
9
Votes
558
Votes
0
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
No community feedback yet

What are some alternatives to RabbitMQ, Hutch?

Kafka

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bootstrap
Materialize

Bootstrap vs Materialize

Laravel
Django

Django vs Laravel vs Node.js

Bootstrap
Foundation

Bootstrap vs Foundation vs Material UI

Node.js
Spring Boot

Node.js vs Spring-Boot

Liquibase
Flyway

Flyway vs Liquibase