InfluxDB vs RabbitMQ: What are the differences?
Developers describe InfluxDB as "An open-source distributed time series database with no external dependencies". InfluxDB is a scalable datastore for metrics, events, and real-time analytics. It has a built-in HTTP API so you don't have to write any server side code to get up and running InfluxDB is designed to be scalable, simple to install and manage, and fast to get data in and out.. On the other hand, RabbitMQ is detailed as "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.
InfluxDB can be classified as a tool in the "Databases" category, while RabbitMQ is grouped under "Message Queue".
Some of the features offered by InfluxDB are:
- Time-Centric Functions
- Scalable Metrics
On the other hand, RabbitMQ provides the following key features:
- Robust messaging for applications
- Easy to use
- Runs on all major operating systems
"Time-series data analysis" is the top reason why over 35 developers like InfluxDB, while over 202 developers mention "It's fast and it works with good metrics/monitoring" as the leading cause for choosing RabbitMQ.
InfluxDB and RabbitMQ are both open source tools. It seems that InfluxDB with 16.6K GitHub stars and 2.37K forks on GitHub has more adoption than RabbitMQ with 5.88K GitHub stars and 1.73K GitHub forks.
According to the StackShare community, RabbitMQ has a broader approval, being mentioned in 921 company stacks & 532 developers stacks; compared to InfluxDB, which is listed in 116 company stacks and 38 developer stacks.
What is InfluxDB?
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
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
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.
Influx doesn't currently natively support horizontal distribution. Hard to recommend it until they implement that.
InfluxDB is a game changer
We use InfluxDB as a store for our data that gets fed into Grafana. It's ideal for this as it's a lightweight storage engine that can be modified on the fly by scripts without having to log into the server itself and manage tables. The HTTP API also makes it ideal for integrating with frontend services.
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.
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.
To track time-series of course, utilizing few retention rules and continuous queries to keep time-series data fast and maintanable
InfluxDB ingests information from various sources (mostly Telegraf instances) into one place for monitoring purposes.