We performed a comparison between Apache Kafka and Redis based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The stream processing is a very valuable aspect of the solution for us."
"Apache Kafka has good integration capabilities and has plenty of adapters in its ecosystem if you want to build something. There are adapters for many platforms, such as Java, Azure, and Microsoft's ecosystem. Other solutions, such as Pulsar have fewer adapters available."
"The solution is very easy to set up."
"With Kafka, events and streaming are persistent, and multiple subscribers can consume the data. This is an advantage of Kafka compared to simple queue-based solutions."
"The open-source version is relatively straightforward to set up and only takes a few minutes."
"We get amazing throughput. We don't get any delay."
"Kafka can process messages in real-time, making it useful for applications that require near-instantaneous processing."
"Good horizontal scaling and design."
"Redis is better tested and is used by large companies. I haven't found a direct alternative to what Redis offers. Plus, there are a lot of support and learning resources available, which help you use Redis efficiently."
"The product offers fast access to my database."
"It makes operations more efficient. The information processing is very fast, and very responsive. It's all about the technology."
"Redis is a simple, powerful, and fast solution."
"The solution's technical support team is good...The solution's initial setup process was straightforward."
"The in-memory data makes it fast."
"The online interface is very fast and easy to use."
"The most valuable features of Redis are its ease of use and speed. It does not have access to the disc and it is fast."
"We struggled a bit with the built-in data transformations because it was a challenge to get them up and running the way we wanted."
"One of the things I am mostly looking for is that once the message is picked up from Kafka, it should not be visible or able to be consumed by other applications, or something along those lines. That feature is not present, but it is not a limitation or anything of the sort; rather, it is a desirable feature. The next release should include a feature that prevents messages from being consumed by other applications once they are picked up by Kafka."
"Apache Kafka can improve by adding a feature out of the box which allows it to deliver only one message."
"The UI is based on command line. It would be helpful if they could come up with a simpler user interface."
"We cannot apply all of our security requirements because it is hard to upload them."
"If the graphical user interface was easier for the Kafka administration it would be much better. Right now, you need to use the program with the command-line interface. If the graphical user interface was easier, it could be a better product."
"Kafka requires non-trivial expertise with DevOps to deploy in production at scale. The organization needs to understand ZooKeeper and Kafka and should consider using additional tools, such as MirrorMaker, so that the organization can survive an availability zone or a region going down."
"Managing Apache Kafka can be a challenge, but there are solutions. I used the newest release, as it seems they have removed Zookeeper, which should make it easier. Confluent provides a fully managed Kafka platform, in which the cluster does not need to be managed."
"There is a lack of documentation on the scalability of the solution."
"The only thing is the lack of a GUI application. There was a time when we needed to resolve an issue in production. If we had a GUI, it would have been easier."
"It's actually quite expensive."
"I would prefer it if there was more information available about Redis. That would make it easier for new beginners. Currently, there is a lack of resources."
"In future releases, I would like Redis to provide its users with an option like schema validation. Currently, the solution lacks to offer such functionality."
"Sometimes, we use Redis as a cluster, and the clusters can sometimes suffer some issues and bring some downtime to your application."
"The initial setup took some time as our technical team needed to familiarize themselves with Redis."
"The development of clusters could improve. Additionally, it would be helpful if it was integrated with Amazon AWS or Google Cloud."
Apache Kafka is ranked 1st in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 76 reviews while Redis is ranked 7th in Database as a Service with 8 reviews. Apache Kafka is rated 8.0, while Redis is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Apache Kafka writes "Real-time processing and reliable for data integrity". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Redis writes "Performs much better than traditional databases, integrates well and lot of learning resources available ". Apache Kafka is most compared with IBM MQ, Amazon SQS, Red Hat AMQ, Anypoint MQ and Memphis, whereas Redis is most compared with Google Cloud Memorystore, Amazon SQS, ActiveMQ, Chroma and Pinecone. See our Apache Kafka vs. Redis report.
See our list of best Message Queue (MQ) Software vendors.
We monitor all Message Queue (MQ) Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
