Apache Kafka vs. Astra Streaming

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Apache Kafka
Score 7.7 out of 10
N/A
Apache Kafka is an open-source stream processing platform developed by the Apache Software Foundation written in Scala and Java. The Kafka event streaming platform is used by thousands of companies for high-performance data pipelines, streaming analytics, data integration, and mission-critical applications.N/A
Astra Streaming
Score 10.0 out of 10
N/A
DataStax Astra Streaming is a fully-managed event streaming service powered by Apache Pulsar that was built to scale. Astra Streaming has been built to run in the cloud of your choice, including (GCP, AWS, Microsoft Azure) without sacrificing open-source compatibility.N/A
Pricing
Apache KafkaAstra Streaming
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Apache KafkaAstra Streaming
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache KafkaAstra Streaming
User Ratings
Apache KafkaAstra Streaming
Likelihood to Recommend
8.0
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
9.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
8.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.4
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache KafkaAstra Streaming
Likelihood to Recommend
For brokering messages, Confluent Kafka is well suited since it offers a managed solution ready to use. Scenarios where the solution is not very well suited are for example, where pricing is an issue. The solution costs quite a lot for basic usage (for example: for 3 clusters, pricing is above 100k$ a year).
Read full review
DataStax Enterprise is a state-of-the-art data management platform that manages our own data across web, mobile, and IoT applications. It is a hybrid cloud-based solution that enables us to meet the availability and performance requirements of web, IoT and mobile platforms.
Read full review
Pros
  • Apache Kafka is able to handle a large number of I/Os (writes) using 3-4 cheap servers.
  • It scales very well over large workloads and can handle extreme-scale deployments (eg. Linkedin with 300 billion user events each day).
  • The same Kafka setup can be used as a messaging bus, storage system or a log aggregator making it easy to maintain as one system feeding multiple applications.
Read full review
  • Easy to operate and save man hours
  • Easy installation and configuration
  • Mature and scalable data warehouse, well supported
Read full review
Cons
  • The Kafka Tool is a community-made Java application that looks and feels from the past century.
  • Logging can be confusing. This certainly shows when we have to do troubleshooting.
  • Hybrid scenarios - pub/sub, but there are services in and outside a Kubernetes cluster. Then there are a ~3 options, but only 2 (the harder ones) are production-safe.
Read full review
  • Their solution is expensive compared to other resolutions, however you get what you pay for.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Kafka has suited our use case very well so far. Going forward we are planning to expand our platform manifold so the load on Kafka and our reliance on Kafka is going to increase only.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Usability
Apache Kafka is highly recommended to develop loosely coupled, real-time processing applications. Also, Apache Kafka provides property based configuration. Producer, Consumer and broker contain their own separate property file
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
Support for Apache Kafka (if willing to pay) is available from Confluent that includes the same time that created Kafka at Linkedin so they know this software in and out. Moreover, Apache Kafka is well known and best practices documents and deployment scenarios are easily available for download. For example, from eBay, Linkedin, Uber, and NYTimes.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
Apache Kafka is built for scale. From high throughput and real-time data streaming, it has a strong advantage over RabbitMQ with its low latency. This put Apache Kafka at the forefront as the platform of choice for large datasets messaging and ensuring scalability when data scale up tremendously. RabbitMQ however has its strengths in traditional messaging. Routing and message delivery reliability are the bedrock of RabbitMQ and this is where RabbitMQ excels. In my previous workplace, RabbitMQ was of choice as reliability matters more than scale. In two words. Apache Kafka for scale, RabbitMQ for reliability. And for cloud deployment and large dataset messaging in what I am doing now, Apache Kafka is the default choice.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Return on Investment
  • Positive: bursts of traffic on special holidays are easy to handle because Kafka can absorb and buffer all the messages we need to process long enough to let an understaffed set of back-end services catch up on processing. Hard to put a number to it but we probably save $5k a month having fewer machines running.
  • Positive: makes decoupling the web and API services from the deeper back-end services easier by providing topics as an interface. This allowed us to split up our teams and have them develop independently of each other, speeding up software development.
  • Negative: our engineers have made mistakes such as accidentally dropping a few thousand messages due to the CLI being confusing to use, and as a result a customer lost some of their precious data. I'd say that was more our fault than Kafka's though.
Read full review
  • In my personal opinion, I can mention that this product has enormous positive points because it has worked really well for us in our organization in a very positive way, for which we ourselves feel quite comfortable with this product.
Read full review
ScreenShots