[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":1326},["ShallowReactive",2],{"active-banner":3,"navbar-featured-partner-blog":24,"navbar-pricing-featured":306,"blog-\u002Fblog\u002Fanatomy-of-a-stream-data-vs-metadata-vs-protocol":1086,"blog-authors-\u002Fblog\u002Fanatomy-of-a-stream-data-vs-metadata-vs-protocol":1274,"related-\u002Fblog\u002Fanatomy-of-a-stream-data-vs-metadata-vs-protocol":1307},{"id":4,"title":5,"date":6,"dismissible":7,"extension":8,"link":9,"link2":10,"linkText":11,"linkText2":12,"meta":13,"stem":21,"variant":22,"__hash__":23},"banners\u002Fbanners\u002Flakestream-ufk-launch.md","StreamNative Introduces Lakestream Architecture and Launches Native Kafka Service","2026-04-07",true,"md","\u002Fblog\u002Ffrom-streams-to-lakestreams","https:\u002F\u002Fconsole.streamnative.cloud\u002Fsignup?from=banner_lakestream-launch","Read Announcement","Sign Up Now",{"body":14},{"type":15,"value":16,"toc":17},"minimark",[],{"title":18,"searchDepth":19,"depth":19,"links":20},"",2,[],"banners\u002Flakestream-ufk-launch","default","zRueBGutATZB0ZnFFHwaEV7F0Di4tnZUHhgOiI4cu6k",{"id":25,"title":26,"authors":27,"body":29,"canonicalUrl":289,"category":290,"createdAt":289,"date":291,"description":292,"extension":8,"featured":7,"image":293,"isDraft":294,"link":289,"meta":295,"navigation":7,"order":296,"path":297,"readingTime":298,"relatedResources":289,"seo":299,"stem":300,"tags":301,"__hash__":305},"blogs\u002Fblog\u002Fstreamnative-recognized-in-the-forrester-wave-streaming-data-platforms-2025.md","StreamNative Recognized as a Contender in The Forrester Wave™: Streaming Data Platforms, Q4 2025",[28],"David Kjerrumgaard",{"type":15,"value":30,"toc":276},[31,39,47,51,67,73,78,81,87,102,109,115,118,124,127,134,140,143,146,157,163,169,172,175,178,184,191,194,197,204,207,210,224,229,233,237,241,245,249,251,268,270],[32,33,35],"h3",{"id":34},"receives-highest-possible-scores-in-both-the-messaging-and-resource-optimization-criteria",[36,37,38],"em",{},"Receives Highest Possible Scores in BOTH the Messaging and Resource Optimization Criteria",[40,41,43],"h2",{"id":42},"introduction",[44,45,46],"strong",{},"Introduction",[48,49,50],"p",{},"Real-time data has become the backbone of modern innovation. As artificial intelligence (AI) and digital services demand instantaneous insights, organizations are realizing that streaming data is no longer optional – it's essential for delivering timely, context-rich experiences. StreamNative's data streaming platform is built precisely for this reality, ensuring data is immediate, reliable, and ready to power critical applications.",[48,52,53,54,63,64],{},"Today, we're excited to announce that Forrester Research has named StreamNative as a Contender in its evaluation, ",[55,56,58],"a",{"href":57},"\u002Freports\u002Frecognized-in-the-forrester-wave-tm-streaming-data-platforms-q4-2025",[36,59,60],{},[44,61,62],{},"The Forrester Wave™: Streaming Data Platforms, Q4 2025",". This report evaluated 15 top streaming data platform providers, and we're proud to share that ",[44,65,66],{},"StreamNative received the highest scores possible—5 out of 5—in both the Messaging and Resource Optimization criteria.",[48,68,69,70],{},"***Forrester's Take: ***",[36,71,72],{},"\"StreamNative is a good fit for enterprises that want an Apache Pulsar implementation that is also compatible with Kafka APIs.\"",[48,74,75],{},[36,76,77],{},"— The Forrester Wave™: Streaming Data Platforms, Q4 2025",[48,79,80],{},"Being recognized in the Forrester Wave is a proud milestone, and for us, it highlights how far StreamNative has come in enabling enterprises to unlock the power of real-time data. In the sections below, we'll dive into what we believe sets StreamNative apart—from our modern architecture and cloud-native design to our open-source foundation and real-time use cases—and how we see these strengths aligning with Forrester's findings.",[40,82,84],{"id":83},"trusted-by-industry-leaders",[44,85,86],{},"Trusted by Industry Leaders",[48,88,89,90,93,94,97,98,101],{},"Companies across industries are already leveraging StreamNative to drive real-time outcomes. Global enterprises like ",[44,91,92],{},"Cisco"," rely on StreamNative to handle massive IoT telemetry, supporting 245 million+ connected devices. Martech leaders such as ",[44,95,96],{},"Iterable"," process billions of events per day with StreamNative for hyper-personalized customer engagement. And in financial services, ",[44,99,100],{},"FICO"," trusts StreamNative to power its real-time fraud detection and analytics pipelines with a secure, scalable streaming backbone.",[48,103,104,105,108],{},"The Forrester report notes that, “",[36,106,107],{},"Customers appreciate the lower infrastructure costs that result from StreamNative’s cost-efficient, Kafka-compatible architecture. Customers note excellent support responsiveness…","”",[40,110,112],{"id":111},"modern-cloud-native-architecture-built-for-scale",[44,113,114],{},"Modern, Cloud-Native Architecture Built for Scale",[48,116,117],{},"From day one, StreamNative was designed with a modern architecture to meet the demanding scale and flexibility requirements of real-time data. Unlike legacy streaming systems that often rely on tightly coupled storage and compute, StreamNative's platform takes a cloud-native approach: it decouples these layers to enable elastic scalability and efficient resource utilization across any environment. The core is powered by Apache Pulsar—a distributed messaging and streaming engine—enhanced with multi-protocol support (including native Apache Kafka API compatibility) to unify diverse data streams under one roof. This means organizations can consolidate siloed messaging systems and handle both high-volume event streams and traditional message queues on a single platform, without sacrificing performance or reliability.",[48,119,120,121,108],{},"Forrester's evaluation described that “",[36,122,123],{},"StreamNative aims to provide a high-performance, multi-protocol streaming data platform: It uses Apache Pulsar with Kafka API compatibility to deliver cost-efficient, real-time applications for enterprises. It appeals to organizations that want a flexible, low-cost streaming solution, due to its focus on scalability and resource optimization, while its investments in Pulsar’s open-source ecosystem and performance optimization make it the primary platform for enterprises wishing to implement Pulsar.",[48,125,126],{},"Our cloud-first, leaderless architecture (with no single broker bottlenecks) and tiered storage model were built to maximize throughput and cost-efficiency for real-time workloads. By separating compute from storage and leveraging distributed object storage, StreamNative can retain huge volumes of event data indefinitely while keeping compute costs in check—effectively providing a flexible, low-cost streaming solution.",[48,128,129,130,133],{},"This modern design not only delivers high performance, but also ensures fault tolerance and geo-distribution out of the box, so enterprises can trust their streaming data is always available and durable. As Forrester’s evaluation noted, StreamNative ",[36,131,132],{},"\"excels at messaging and resource optimization\" and “Its platform supports use cases like real-time analytics and event-driven architectures with robust scalability.","” Our architecture provides the strong foundation that today's real-time applications demand, from ultra-fast data ingestion to seamless scale-out across hybrid and multi-cloud environments.",[40,135,137],{"id":136},"open-source-foundation-and-pulsar-expertise",[44,138,139],{},"Open Source Foundation and Pulsar Expertise",[48,141,142],{},"StreamNative's DNA is rooted in open source innovation. Our founders are the original creators of Apache Pulsar, and we've built our platform with the same open principles: freedom, flexibility, and community-driven innovation. For developers and data teams, this means adopting StreamNative comes with no proprietary lock-in—instead, you get a platform built on open standards and a thriving ecosystem. We offer broad API compatibility (Pulsar, Kafka, JMS, MQTT, and more) so that teams can work with familiar interfaces and integrate StreamNative into existing systems with ease.",[48,144,145],{},"StreamNative is the primary commercial contributor to the Apache Pulsar project and its surrounding ecosystem. We invest heavily in Pulsar's ongoing improvements our investments in Pulsar's open-source ecosystem and performance optimization bolster StreamNative's value. We also foster a vibrant community through initiatives like the Data Streaming Summit and free training resources.",[48,147,148,149,152,153,156],{},"Forrester's assessment noted that StreamNative’s “",[36,150,151],{},"events-driven agents, extensibility, and performance architecture are solid,","” and we're continuing to build on that foundation. ",[44,154,155],{},"We're actively investing in expanding our tooling for observability, governance, schema management, and developer productivity","—areas we recognize as critical for enterprise adoption and where we're committed to accelerating our roadmap.",[48,158,159,160],{},"Being open also means embracing an open ecosystem of technologies. StreamNative actively integrates with the tools and platforms that matter most to our users. We partner with industry leaders like Snowflake, Databricks, Google, and Ververica to ensure our streaming platform works seamlessly with data warehouses, lakehouse storage, and stream processing frameworks. Forrester’s evaluation observed that StreamNative’s ",[36,161,162],{},"\"investments in Pulsar’s open-source ecosystem and performance optimization make it the primary platform for enterprises wishing to implement Pulsar.\"",[40,164,166],{"id":165},"powering-real-time-use-cases-across-industries",[44,167,168],{},"Powering Real-Time Use Cases Across Industries",[48,170,171],{},"One of the greatest validations of StreamNative's approach is the success our customers are achieving with real-time data. StreamNative's platform is versatile and use-case agnostic—if an application demands high-volume, low-latency data movement, we can power it. This flexibility is why our customer base spans industries from finance and IoT to major automobile manufacturers and online gaming. The common thread is that these organizations need to process and react to data in milliseconds, and StreamNative is delivering the capabilities to make that possible.",[48,173,174],{},"Cisco uses StreamNative to underpin an IoT telemetry system of colossal scale, connecting hundreds of millions of devices and thousands of enterprise clients with real-time data streams. The platform's multi-tenant design and proven reliability allow Cisco to offer its customers a live feed of device data with unwavering confidence. In the financial sector, FICO has built streaming pipelines on StreamNative to detect fraud as transactions happen and to monitor systems in real time. With StreamNative's strong guarantees around message durability and ordering, FICO can catch anomalies or suspicious patterns within seconds. And in digital customer engagement, Iterable relies on StreamNative to process billions of events every day—clicks, views, purchases—so that marketers can trigger personalized campaigns instantly based on user behavior.",[48,176,177],{},"Our customers uniformly deal with mission-critical data streams, where downtime or delays are unacceptable. StreamNative's fault-tolerant, scalable infrastructure has proven equal to the task, handling scenarios like bursting to millions of events per second or seamlessly spanning multiple cloud regions. Forrester's report recognized StreamNative for supporting event-driven architectures with robust scalability—which for us is a reflection of our platform's ability to meet the most demanding enterprise requirements.",[40,179,181],{"id":180},"continuing-to-innovate-ursa-orca-and-the-road-ahead",[44,182,183],{},"Continuing to Innovate: Ursa, Orca, and the Road Ahead",[48,185,186,187,190],{},"While we are thrilled to be recognized in Forrester's Streaming Data Platforms Wave, we view this as just the beginning. StreamNative's vision has always been bold: to ",[44,188,189],{},"provide a unified platform that not only handles today's streaming needs but also anticipates the emerging requirements of tomorrow",".",[48,192,193],{},"One key area of focus is the convergence of streaming data with advanced analytics and AI. As Forrester points out in the report, technology leaders should look for platforms that natively integrate messaging, stream processing, and analytics to provide AI agents with real-time, contextualized information. We couldn't agree more. Our award-winning Ursa Engine and Orca Agent Engine are aimed at extending our platform up the stack—bridging the gap between data streams and data lakes, and between event streams and intelligent processing.",[48,195,196],{},"Our new Ursa Engine introduces a lakehouse-native approach to streaming: it can write events directly to table formats like Iceberg on cloud storage, eliminating entire classes of ETL jobs and making fresh data instantly available for analytics queries. By integrating streaming and lakehouse technologies, we help customers collapse data silos and accelerate their AI\u002FML pipelines.",[48,198,199,200,203],{},"Beyond analytics integration, we are also enhancing StreamNative with more out-of-the-box processing and governance capabilities. In the coming months, we plan to introduce new features for lightweight stream processing and transformation, making it easier to build reactive applications directly on the platform. We're also expanding our ecosystem of connectors and integrations, so that whether your data lands in Snowflake, Databricks, or an AI model, StreamNative will seamlessly feed it. ",[44,201,202],{},"We're investing significantly in enterprise features including security, schema registry, governance, and monitoring tooling","—capabilities that are essential for mission-critical deployments and where we're committed to continued improvement.",[48,205,206],{},"This recognition from Forrester energizes us to keep innovating at full speed. We're sharing this honor with our amazing customers, community, and partners who drive us forward every day. Your feedback and real-world challenges have helped shape StreamNative into what it is today, and together, we will shape the future of streaming data. Thank you for joining us on this journey—we're just getting started, and we can't wait to deliver even more value as we continue to evolve our platform. Onward to real-time everything!",[208,209],"hr",{},[32,211,213],{"id":212},"streamnative-in-the-forrester-wave-evaluation-findings",[44,214,215,216,223],{},"StreamNative in ",[44,217,218],{},[55,219,220],{"href":57},[44,221,222],{},"The Forrester Wave™",": Evaluation Findings",[225,226,228],"h5",{"id":227},"recognized-as-a-contender-among-15-streaming-data-platform-providers","• Recognized as a Contender among 15 streaming data platform providers",[225,230,232],{"id":231},"received-the-highest-scores-possible-50-in-both-the-messaging-and-resource-optimization-criteria","* Received the highest scores possible (5.0) in both the Messaging and Resource Optimization criteria",[225,234,236],{"id":235},"cited-as-the-primary-platform-for-enterprises-wishing-to-implement-pulsar","• Cited as the primary platform for enterprises wishing to implement Pulsar",[225,238,240],{"id":239},"noted-for-excelling-at-messaging-and-resource-optimization","• Noted for excelling at messaging and resource optimization",[225,242,244],{"id":243},"customers-cited-lower-infrastructure-costs-and-excellent-support-responsiveness","• Customers cited lower infrastructure costs and excellent support responsiveness",[225,246,248],{"id":247},"recognized-for-supporting-event-driven-architectures-with-robust-scalability","• Recognized for supporting event-driven architectures with robust scalability",[208,250],{},[252,253,255,256,259,260,190],"h6",{"id":254},"forrester-disclaimer-forrester-does-not-endorse-any-company-product-brand-or-service-included-in-its-research-publications-and-does-not-advise-any-person-to-select-the-products-or-services-of-any-company-or-brand-based-on-the-ratings-included-in-such-publications-information-is-based-on-the-best-available-resources-opinions-reflect-judgment-at-the-time-and-are-subject-to-change-for-more-information-read-about-forresters-objectivity-here","**Forrester Disclaimer: **",[36,257,258],{},"Forrester does not endorse any company, product, brand, or service included in its research publications and does not advise any person to select the products or services of any company or brand based on the ratings included in such publications. Information is based on the best available resources. Opinions reflect judgment at the time and are subject to change",". *For more information, read about Forrester’s objectivity *",[55,261,265],{"href":262,"rel":263},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.forrester.com\u002Fabout-us\u002Fobjectivity\u002F",[264],"nofollow",[36,266,267],{},"here",[208,269],{},[252,271,273],{"id":272},"apache-apache-pulsar-apache-kafka-apache-flink-and-other-names-are-trademarks-of-the-apache-software-foundation-no-endorsement-by-apache-or-other-third-parties-is-implied",[36,274,275],{},"Apache®, Apache Pulsar®, Apache Kafka®, Apache Flink® and other names are trademarks of The Apache Software Foundation. No endorsement by Apache or other third parties is implied.",{"title":18,"searchDepth":19,"depth":19,"links":277},[278,280,281,282,283,284,285],{"id":34,"depth":279,"text":38},3,{"id":42,"depth":19,"text":46},{"id":83,"depth":19,"text":86},{"id":111,"depth":19,"text":114},{"id":136,"depth":19,"text":139},{"id":165,"depth":19,"text":168},{"id":180,"depth":19,"text":183,"children":286},[287],{"id":212,"depth":279,"text":288},"StreamNative in The Forrester Wave™: Evaluation Findings",null,"Company","2025-12-16","StreamNative is recognized in The Forrester Wave™: Streaming Data Platforms, Q4 2025. Discover why Forrester highlights StreamNative's high-performance messaging, efficient resource use, and cost-effective Kafka API compatibility for real-time innovation.","\u002Fimgs\u002Fblogs\u002F693bd36cf01b217dcb67278f_Streamnative_blog_thumbnail.png",false,{},0,"\u002Fblog\u002Fstreamnative-recognized-in-the-forrester-wave-streaming-data-platforms-2025","10 mins read",{"title":26,"description":292},"blog\u002Fstreamnative-recognized-in-the-forrester-wave-streaming-data-platforms-2025",[302,303,304],"Announcements","Real-Time","Forrester","5Nr1vAcqlQ7yFQfdL0a3MLsNFerVmEOQJXD9Twz5lx8",{"id":307,"title":308,"authors":309,"body":314,"canonicalUrl":289,"category":1073,"createdAt":289,"date":1074,"description":1075,"extension":8,"featured":7,"image":1076,"isDraft":294,"link":289,"meta":1077,"navigation":7,"order":296,"path":1078,"readingTime":1079,"relatedResources":289,"seo":1080,"stem":1081,"tags":1082,"__hash__":1085},"blogs\u002Fblog\u002Fhow-we-run-a-5-gb-s-kafka-workload-for-just-50-per-hour.md","How We Run a 5 GB\u002Fs Kafka Workload for Just $50 per Hour",[310,311,312,313],"Matteo Meril","Neng Lu","Hang Chen","Penghui Li",{"type":15,"value":315,"toc":1043},[316,319,322,325,328,331,335,338,348,354,357,365,370,374,381,384,387,395,399,402,407,411,414,417,420,423,432,436,439,450,453,457,460,463,474,477,481,485,493,496,500,508,537,541,544,549,553,556,560,563,566,571,580,585,588,591,602,606,609,620,624,627,630,635,638,667,671,673,679,682,687,692,695,699,713,717,728,732,747,756,767,770,773,777,780,783,794,797,800,803,808,813,817,821,838,842,856,861,865,876,879,895,899,910,915,920,928,932,935,939,946,950,953,962,967,976,982,991,1000,1009,1018,1027,1035],[48,317,318],{},"The rise of DeepSeek has shaken the AI infrastructure market, forcing companies to confront the escalating costs of training and deploying AI models. But the real pressure point isn’t just compute—it’s data acquisition and ingestion costs.",[48,320,321],{},"As businesses rethink their AI cost-containment strategies, real-time data streaming is emerging as a critical enabler. The growing adoption of Kafka as a standard protocol has expanded cost-efficient options, allowing companies to optimize streaming analytics while keeping expenses in check.",[48,323,324],{},"Ursa, the data streaming engine powering StreamNative’s managed Kafka service, is built for this new reality. With its leaderless architecture and native lakehouse storage integration, Ursa eliminates costly inter-zone network traffic for data replication and client-to-broker communication while ensuring high availability at minimal operational cost.",[48,326,327],{},"In this blog post, we benchmarked the infrastructure cost and total cost of ownership (TCO) for running a 5GB\u002Fs Kafka workload across different Kafka vendors, including Redpanda, Confluent WarpStream, and AWS MSK. Our benchmark results show that Ursa can sustain 5GB\u002Fs Kafka workloads at just 5% of the cost of traditional streaming engines like Redpanda—making it the ideal solution for high-performance, cost-efficient ingestion and data streaming for data lakehouses and AI workloads.",[48,329,330],{},"Note: We also evaluated vanilla Kafka in our benchmark; however, for simplicity, we have focused our cost comparison on vendor solutions rather than self-managed deployments. That said, it is important to highlight that both Redpanda and vanilla Kafka use a leader-based data replication approach. In a data-intensive, network-bound workload like 5GB\u002Fs streaming, with the same machine type and replication factor, Redpanda and vanilla Kafka produced nearly identical cost profiles.",[40,332,334],{"id":333},"key-benchmark-findings","Key Benchmark Findings",[48,336,337],{},"Ursa delivered 5 GB\u002Fs of sustained throughput at an infrastructure cost of just $54 per hour. For comparison:",[339,340,341,345],"ul",{},[342,343,344],"li",{},"MSK: $303 per hour → 5.6x more expensive compared to Ursa",[342,346,347],{},"Redpanda: $988 per hour → 18x more expensive compared to Ursa",[48,349,350],{},[351,352],"img",{"alt":18,"src":353},"\u002Fimgs\u002Fblogs\u002F679c71b67d9046f26edc7977_AD_4nXfvTqyBNUBu2lObdkKAx-5UNkpNP8UYULLZyOcixE6z99VMZUUEsUqWjzexI7vjyNGRNSAUoM9smYvdTP55ctAhIbrs5lmQgcSVMWdaoigbWouCl95DVSQsxooY-qqfGcYqS4g4zA.png",[48,355,356],{},"Beyond infrastructure costs, when factoring in both storage pricing, vendor pricing and operational expenses, Ursa’s total cost of ownership (TCO) for a 5GB\u002Fs workload with a 7-day retention period is:",[339,358,359,362],{},[342,360,361],{},"50% cheaper than Confluent WarpStream",[342,363,364],{},"85% cheaper than MSK and Redpanda",[48,366,367],{},[351,368],{"alt":18,"src":369},"\u002Fimgs\u002Fblogs\u002F679c602d77e9c706de5343b8_AD_4nXeDv8rrv_C1CTCCiqYo1zpvlGYbdBk1r0VEqovAPu22iFMQZgh54Hfw9PBMLzM7jDFxKwAFDxbdG0np4XVk_tGsWhEKMloLRcmmea7lvueCx-0cFsyaE3Mya4Mxc1Dox95A6JEc.png",[40,371,373],{"id":372},"ursa-highly-cost-efficient-data-streaming-at-scale","Ursa: Highly Cost-Efficient Data Streaming at Scale",[48,375,376,380],{},[55,377,379],{"href":378},"\u002Fblog\u002Fursa-reimagine-apache-kafka-for-the-cost-conscious-data-streaming","Ursa"," is a next-generation data streaming engine designed to deliver high performance at a fraction of the cost of traditional disk-based solutions. It is fully compatible with Apache Kafka and Apache Pulsar APIs, while leveraging a leaderless, lakehouse-native architecture to maximize scalability, efficiency, and cost savings.",[48,382,383],{},"Ursa’s key innovation is separating storage from compute and decoupling metadata\u002Findex operations from data operations by utilizing cloud object storage (e.g., AWS S3) instead of costly inter-zone disk-based replication. It also employs open lakehouse formats (Iceberg and Delta Lake), enabling columnar compression to significantly reduce storage costs while maintaining durability and availability.",[48,385,386],{},"In contrast, traditional streaming systems—like Kafka and Redpanda—depend on leader-based architectures, which drive up inter-zone traffic costs due to replication and client communication. Ursa mitigates these costs by:",[339,388,389,392],{},[342,390,391],{},"Eliminating inter-zone traffic costs via a leaderless architecture.",[342,393,394],{},"Replacing costly inter-zone replication with direct writes to cloud storage using open lakehouse formats.",[40,396,398],{"id":397},"how-ursa-eliminates-inter-zone-traffic","How Ursa Eliminates Inter-Zone Traffic",[48,400,401],{},"Ursa minimizes inter-zone traffic by leveraging a leaderless architecture, which eliminates inter-zone communication between clients and brokers, and lakehouse-native storage, which removes the need for inter-zone data replication. This approach ensures high availability and scalability while avoiding unnecessary cross-zone data movement.",[48,403,404],{},[351,405],{"alt":18,"src":406},"\u002Fimgs\u002Fblogs\u002F679c602e21b3571bb7117dca_AD_4nXd7Oahc77NjRLNvA9clLt0tsyU6MrIqVibFYv5pW5giTIcCHPr3EA_yTGzfVEUIVO3VXK56qWK8zmBCp5lY0E_4nmlWIPFrHjtHylA5NhwELjn-UB0fLG2h_kbrxrc7Cs_edvveNA.png",[32,408,410],{"id":409},"leaderless-architecture","Leaderless architecture",[48,412,413],{},"Traditional streaming engines such as Kafka, Pulsar, or RedPanda rely on a leader-based model, where each partition is assigned to a single leader broker that handles all writes and reads.",[48,415,416],{},"Pros of Leader-Based Architectures:\n✔ Maintains message ordering via local sequence IDs\n✔ Delivers low latency and high performance through message caching",[48,418,419],{},"Cons of Leader-Based Architectures:\n✖ Throughput bottlenecked by a single broker per partition\n✖ Inter-zone traffic required for high availability in multi-AZ deployments",[48,421,422],{},"While Kafka and Pulsar offer partial solutions (e.g., reading from followers, shadow topics) to reduce read-related inter-zone traffic, producers still send data to a single leader.",[48,424,425,426,431],{},"Ursa removes the concept of topic ownership, allowing any broker in the cluster to handle reads or writes for any partition. The primary challenge—ensuring message ordering—is solved with ",[55,427,430],{"href":428,"rel":429},"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fstreamnative\u002Foxia",[264],"Oxia",", a scalable metadata and index service created by StreamNative in 2022.",[32,433,435],{"id":434},"oxia-the-metadata-layer-enabling-leaderless-architecture","Oxia: The Metadata Layer Enabling Leaderless Architecture",[48,437,438],{},"Ensuring message ordering in a leaderless architecture is complex, but Ursa solves this with Oxia:",[339,440,441,444,447],{},[342,442,443],{},"Handles millions of metadata\u002Findex operations per second",[342,445,446],{},"Generates sequential IDs to maintain strict message ordering",[342,448,449],{},"Optimized for Kubernetes with horizontal scalability",[48,451,452],{},"Producers and consumers can connect to any broker within their local AZ, eliminating inter-zone traffic costs while maintaining performance through localized caching.",[32,454,456],{"id":455},"zero-interzone-data-replication","Zero interzone data replication",[48,458,459],{},"In most distributed systems, data replication from a leader (primary) to followers (replicas) is crucial for fault tolerance and availability. However, replication across zones can inflate infrastructure expenses substantially.",[48,461,462],{},"Ursa avoids these costs by writing data directly to cloud storage (e.g., AWS S3, Google GCS):",[339,464,465,468,471],{},[342,466,467],{},"Built-In Resilience: Cloud storage inherently offers high availability and fault tolerance without inter-zone traffic fees.",[342,469,470],{},"Tradeoff: Slightly higher latency (sub-second, with p99 at 500 milliseconds) compared to local disk\u002FEBS (single-digit to sub-100 milliseconds), in exchange for significantly lower costs (up to 10x lower).",[342,472,473],{},"Flexible Modes: Ursa is an addition to the classic BookKeeper-based engine, providing users with the flexibility to optimize for either cost or low latency based on their workload requirements.",[48,475,476],{},"By foregoing conventional replication, Ursa slashes inter-zone traffic costs and associated complexities—making it a compelling option for organizations seeking to balance high-performance data streaming with strict budget constraints.",[40,478,480],{"id":479},"how-we-ran-a-5-gbs-test-with-ursa","How We Ran a 5 GB\u002Fs Test with Ursa",[32,482,484],{"id":483},"ursa-cluster-deployment","Ursa Cluster Deployment",[339,486,487,490],{},[342,488,489],{},"9 brokers across 3 availability zones, each on m6i.8xlarge (Fixed 12.5 Gbps bandwidth, 32 vCPU cores, 128 GB memory).",[342,491,492],{},"Oxia cluster (metadata store) with 3 nodes of m6i.8xlarge, distributed across three availability zones (AZs).",[48,494,495],{},"During peak throughput (5 GB\u002Fs), each broker’s network usage was about 10 Gbps.",[32,497,499],{"id":498},"openmessaging-benchmark-workers-configuration","OpenMessaging Benchmark Workers & Configuration",[48,501,502,503,507],{},"The OpenMessaging Benchmark(OMB) Framework is a suite of tools that make it easy to benchmark distributed messaging systems in the cloud. Please check ",[55,504,505],{"href":505,"rel":506},"https:\u002F\u002Fopenmessaging.cloud\u002Fdocs\u002Fbenchmarks\u002F",[264]," for details.",[339,509,510,525,534],{},[342,511,512,513,518,519,524],{},"12 OMB workers: 6 for ",[55,514,517],{"href":515,"rel":516},"https:\u002F\u002Fgist.github.com\u002Fcodelipenghui\u002Fd1094122270775e4f1580947f80c5055",[264],"producers",", 6 for ",[55,520,523],{"href":521,"rel":522},"https:\u002F\u002Fgist.github.com\u002Fcodelipenghui\u002F06bada89381fb77a7862e1b4c1d8963d",[264],"consumers"," across 3 availability zones, on m6i.8xlarge instances. Each worker is configured with 12 CPU cores and 48 GB memory.",[342,526,527,528,533],{},"Sample YAML ",[55,529,532],{"href":530,"rel":531},"https:\u002F\u002Fgist.github.com\u002Fcodelipenghui\u002F204c1f26c4d44a218ae235bf2de99904",[264],"scripts"," provided for Kafka-compatible configuration and rate limits.",[342,535,536],{},"Achieved consistent 5 GB\u002Fs publish\u002Fsubscribe throughput.",[40,538,540],{"id":539},"ursa-benchmark-tests-results","Ursa Benchmark Tests & Results",[48,542,543],{},"The following diagram demonstrates that Ursa can consistently handle 5 GB\u002Fs of traffic, fully saturating the network across all broker nodes.",[48,545,546],{},[351,547],{"alt":18,"src":548},"\u002Fimgs\u002Fblogs\u002F679c602d7b261bac1113f7d6_AD_4nXdDPsRc3koXICiFF0bqSmGWbJt_RlUy4FE3ruuWOfbCfpcqZ1dejjqGbkaCJv2hQFL1nirRouBVRW2l5uMWBvY9naMqGB_wHcLI14dBM0f85TXhmdm3UxEv1yGX9Y4hf5FttSkZew.png",[40,550,552],{"id":551},"comparing-infrastructure-cost","Comparing Infrastructure Cost",[48,554,555],{},"This benchmark first evaluates infrastructure costs of running a 5 GB\u002Fs streaming workload (1:1 producer-to-consumer ratio) across different data streaming engines, including Ursa, Redpanda, and AWS MSK, with a focus on multi-AZ deployments to ensure a fair comparison.",[32,557,559],{"id":558},"test-setup-key-assumptions","Test Setup & Key Assumptions",[48,561,562],{},"All tests use multi-AZ configurations, with clusters and clients distributed across three AWS availability zones (AZs). Cluster size scales proportionally to the number of AZs, and rack-awareness is enabled for all engines to evenly distribute topic partitions and leaders.",[48,564,565],{},"To ensure a fair comparison, we selected the same machine type capable of fully utilizing both network and storage bandwidth for Ursa and Redpanda in this 5GB\u002Fs test:",[339,567,568],{},[342,569,570],{},"9 × m6i.8xlarge instances",[48,572,573,574,579],{},"However, MSK's storage bandwidth limits vary depending on the selected instance type, with the highest allowed limit capped at 1000 MiB\u002Fs per broker, according to",[55,575,578],{"href":576,"rel":577},"https:\u002F\u002Fdocs.aws.amazon.com\u002Fmsk\u002Flatest\u002Fdeveloperguide\u002Fmsk-provision-throughput-management.html#throughput-bottlenecks",[264]," AWS documentation",". Given this constraint, achieving 5 GB\u002Fs throughput with a replication factor of 3 required the following setup:",[339,581,582],{},[342,583,584],{},"15 × kafka.m7g.8xlarge (32 vCPUs, 128 GB memory, 15 Gbps network, 4000 GiB EBS).",[48,586,587],{},"This configuration was necessary to work around MSK's storage bandwidth limitations, ensuring a comparable cost basis to other evaluated streaming engines.",[48,589,590],{},"Additional key assumptions include:",[339,592,593,596,599],{},[342,594,595],{},"Inter-AZ producer traffic: For leader-based engines, two-thirds of producer-to-broker traffic crosses AZs due to leader distribution.",[342,597,598],{},"Consumer optimizations: Follower fetch is enabled across all tests, eliminating inter-AZ consumer traffic.",[342,600,601],{},"Storage cost exclusions: This benchmark only evaluates streaming costs, assuming no long-term data retention.",[32,603,605],{"id":604},"inter-broker-replication-costs","Inter-Broker Replication Costs",[48,607,608],{},"Inter-broker (cross-AZ) replication is a major cost driver for data streaming engines:",[339,610,611,614,617],{},[342,612,613],{},"RedPanda: Inter-broker replication is not free, leading to substantial costs when data must be copied across multiple availability zones.",[342,615,616],{},"AWS MSK: Inter-broker replication is free, but MSK instance pricing is significantly higher (e.g., $3.264 per hour for kafka.m7g.8xlarge vs $1.306 per hour for an on-demand m7g.8xlarge). The storage price of MSK is $0.10 per GB-month which is significantly higher than st1, which costs $0.045 per GB-month. Even though replication is free, client-to-broker traffic still incurs inter-AZ charges.",[342,618,619],{},"Ursa: No inter-broker replication costs due to its leaderless architecture, eliminating inter-zone replication costs entirely.",[32,621,623],{"id":622},"zone-affinity-reducing-inter-az-costs","Zone Affinity: Reducing Inter-AZ Costs",[48,625,626],{},"We evaluated zone affinity mechanisms to further reduce inter-AZ data transfer costs.",[48,628,629],{},"Consumers:",[339,631,632],{},[342,633,634],{},"Follower fetch is enabled across all tests, ensuring consumers fetch data from replicas in their local AZ—eliminating inter-zone consumer traffic except for metadata lookups",[48,636,637],{},"Producers:",[339,639,640,649,658],{},[342,641,642,643,648],{},"Kafka protocol lacks an easy way to enforce producer AZ affinity (though ",[55,644,647],{"href":645,"rel":646},"https:\u002F\u002Fcwiki.apache.org\u002Fconfluence\u002Fdisplay\u002FKAFKA\u002FKIP-1123:+Rack-aware+partitioning+for+Kafka+Producer",[264],"KIP-1123"," aims to address this). And it only works with the default partitioner (i.e., when no record partition or record key is specified).",[342,650,651,652,657],{},"Redpanda recently introduced ",[55,653,656],{"href":654,"rel":655},"https:\u002F\u002Fdocs.redpanda.com\u002Fredpanda-cloud\u002Fdevelop\u002Fproduce-data\u002Fleader-pinning\u002F",[264],"leader pinning",", but this only benefits setups where producers are confined to a single AZ—not applicable to our multi-AZ benchmark.",[342,659,660,661,666],{},"Ursa is the only system in this test with ",[55,662,665],{"href":663,"rel":664},"https:\u002F\u002Fdocs.streamnative.io\u002Fdocs\u002Fconfig-kafka-client#eliminate-cross-az-networking-traffic",[264],"built-in zone affinity for both producers and consumers",". It achieves this by embedding producer AZ information in client.id, allowing metadata lookups to route clients to local-AZ brokers, eliminating inter-AZ producer traffic.",[32,668,670],{"id":669},"cost-comparison-results","Cost Comparison Results",[48,672,337],{},[339,674,675,677],{},[342,676,344],{},[342,678,347],{},[48,680,681],{},"Ursa’s leaderless architecture, zone affinity, and native cloud storage integration deliver unparalleled cost efficiency, making it the most cost-effective choice for high-throughput data streaming workloads.",[48,683,684],{},[351,685],{"alt":18,"src":686},"\u002Fimgs\u002Fblogs\u002F679c72208198ca36a352f228_AD_4nXeeZuM8T-xBlD4Vf3j67K618n08qh8wIDLLtiLJG0ssA1Wj1V26u7wIDTX9sqLrtw8mB2c299dwzarGen62CG0Vh7nWstn5qbPGFcBaKJYEepTsLr5fHWv1U8uqbg8Y0UOK6fJ7.png",[48,688,689],{},[351,690],{"alt":18,"src":691},"\u002Fimgs\u002Fblogs\u002F679c625978031f40229de484_AD_4nXdLkLLJ30KKr-_A_rN1j8akVwBYacAWIPzWHoOReJF421890kfByZoQQxkLczihVSmiw5Q9J51-V9I2SEKITbwsYnANDDTlAVL5nQ_jfaHNTe9VEWhSoa7DZooCnilDYL6l6msmJg.png",[48,693,694],{},"The detailed infrastructure cost calculations for each data streaming engine are listed below:",[32,696,698],{"id":697},"streamnative-ursa","StreamNative - Ursa",[339,700,701,704,707,710],{},[342,702,703],{},"Server EC2 costs: 9 * $1.536\u002Fhr = $14",[342,705,706],{},"Client EC2 costs: 9 * $1.536\u002Fhr =$14",[342,708,709],{},"S3 write requests costs: 1350 r\u002Fs * $0.005\u002F1000r * 3600s = $24",[342,711,712],{},"S3 read requests costs: 1350 r\u002Fs * $0.0004\u002F1000r * 3600s = $2",[32,714,716],{"id":715},"aws-msk","AWS MSK",[339,718,719,722,725],{},[342,720,721],{},"Server EC2 costs: 15 * $3.264\u002Fhr = $49",[342,723,724],{},"Client side EC2 costs: 9 * $1.536\u002Fhr =$14",[342,726,727],{},"Interzone traffic - producer to broker: 5GB\u002Fs * ⅔ * $0.02\u002FG(in+out) * 3600 = $240",[32,729,731],{"id":730},"redpanda","RedPanda",[339,733,734,736,738,741,744],{},[342,735,703],{},[342,737,706],{},[342,739,740],{},"Interzone traffic - producer to broker: 5GB\u002Fs * ⅔ * $0.02\u002FGB(in+out) * 3600 = $240",[342,742,743],{},"Interzone traffic - replication: 10GB\u002Fs * $0.02\u002FGB(in+out) * 3600 = $720",[342,745,746],{},"Interzone traffic - broker to consumer: $0 (fetch from local zone)",[48,748,749,750,755],{},"Please note that we were unable to test ",[55,751,754],{"href":752,"rel":753},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.redpanda.com\u002Fblog\u002Fcloud-topics-streaming-data-object-storage",[264],"Redpanda with Cloud Topics",", as it remains an announced but unreleased feature and is not yet available for evaluation. Based on the limited information available, while Cloud Topics may help optimize inter-zone data replication costs, producers still need to traverse inter-availability zones to connect to the topic partition owners and incur inter-zone traffic costs of up to $240 per hour.",[339,757,758,764],{},[342,759,760,763],{},[55,761,647],{"href":645,"rel":762},[264]," (when implemented) will help mitigate producer-to-broker inter-zone traffic, but it is not yet available. And it only works with the default partitioner (no record partition or key is specified).",[342,765,766],{},"Redpanda’s leader pinning helps only when all producers for the pinned topic are confined to a single AZ. In multi-AZ environments (like our benchmark), inter-zone producer traffic remains unavoidable.",[48,768,769],{},"Additionally, Redpanda’s Cloud Topics architecture is not documented publicly. Their blog mentions \"leader placement rules to optimize produce latency and ingress cost,\" but it is unclear whether this represents a shift away from a leader-based architecture or if it uses techniques similar to Ursa’s zone-aware approach.",[48,771,772],{},"We may revisit this comparison as more details become available.",[40,774,776],{"id":775},"comparing-total-cost-of-ownership","Comparing Total Cost of Ownership",[48,778,779],{},"As highlighted earlier, with a BYOC Ursa setup, you can achieve 5 GB\u002Fs throughput at just 5% of the infrastructure cost of a traditional leader-based data streaming engine, such as Kafka or RedPanda, while managing the infrastructure yourself. This significant cost reduction is enabled by Ursa’s leaderless architecture and lakehouse-native storage design, which eliminate overhead costs such as inter-zone traffic and leader-based data replication. By leveraging a lakehouse-native, leaderless architecture, Ursa reduces resource requirements, enabling you to handle high data throughput efficiently and at a fraction of the cost of RedPanda.",[48,781,782],{},"Now, let’s examine the total cost comparison, evaluating Ursa alongside other vendors, including those that have adopted a leaderless architecture (e.g., Confluent WarpStream). This comparison is based on a 5GB\u002Fs workload with a 7-day retention period, factoring in both storage cost and vendor costs Here are the key findings:",[339,784,785,788,791],{},[342,786,787],{},"Ursa ($164,353\u002Fmonth) is: 50% cheaper than Confluent WarpStream ($337,068\u002Fmonth)",[342,789,790],{},"85% cheaper than AWS MSK ($1,115,251\u002Fmonth)",[342,792,793],{},"86% cheaper than Redpanda ($1,202,853\u002Fmonth)",[48,795,796],{},"In addition to Ursa’s architectural advantages—eliminating most inter-AZ traffic and leveraging lakehouse storage for cost-effective data retention—it also adopts a more fair and cost-efficient pricing model: Elastic Throughput-based pricing. This approach aligns costs with actual usage, avoiding unnecessary overhead.",[48,798,799],{},"Unlike WarpStream, which charges for both storage and throughput, Ursa ensures that customers only pay for the throughput they actively use. Ursa’s pricing is based on compressed data sent by clients, meaning the more data compressed on the client side, the lower the cost. In contrast, WarpStream prices are based on uncompressed data, unfairly inflating expenses and failing to incentivize customers to optimize their client applications.",[48,801,802],{},"This distinction is crucial, as compressed data reduces both storage and network costs, making Ursa’s pricing model not only more cost-effective but also more transparent and predictable.",[48,804,805],{},[351,806],{"alt":18,"src":807},"\u002Fimgs\u002Fblogs\u002F679c602d194800c9206d9d58_AD_4nXcFlf755xgyz7htxhMhBV5fGrsxy642mQNodt61DTok_z1dwkw5A6lkO5hatXVneCaB0anbZPAyvLI3MlIMuQEYLEACHHvQMOr5UfaB37dfzkdqewDEvcT-20VGd_zzvJsuA00zGA.png",[48,809,810],{},[351,811],{"alt":18,"src":812},"\u002Fimgs\u002Fblogs\u002F679c62594e9c2e629fae73aa_AD_4nXeU6cOgItnjLsEZCOf13TEvMY_SHWWIxYP2OYUj-B1GUPyWO78OG08K_v03hwYSVcg06f9dqDiGmdwy76vynjmiDGL5bluZ5_XF4nSU_r59oOZdfViXndXt6s11vVOY7qwfZN8v.png",[32,814,816],{"id":815},"cost-breakdown","Cost Breakdown",[818,819,820],"h4",{"id":697},"StreamNative – Ursa",[339,822,823,826,829,832,835],{},[342,824,825],{},"EC2 (Server): 9 × $1.536\u002Fhr × 24 hr × 30 days = $9,953.28",[342,827,828],{},"S3 Write Requests: 1,350 r\u002Fs × $0.005\u002F1,000 r × 3,600 s × 24 hr × 30 days = $17,496",[342,830,831],{},"S3 Read Requests: 1,350 r\u002Fs × $0.0004\u002F1,000 r × 3,600 s × 24 hr × 30 days = $1,400",[342,833,834],{},"S3 Storage Costs: 5 GB\u002Fs × $0.021\u002FGB × 3,600 s × 24 hr × 7 days = $63,504",[342,836,837],{},"Vendor Cost: 200 ETU × $0.50\u002Fhr × 24 hr × 30 days = $72,000",[818,839,841],{"id":840},"warpstream","WarpStream",[339,843,844,847],{},[342,845,846],{},"Based on WarpStream’s pricing calculator (as of January 29, 2025), we assume a 4:1 client data compression ratio, meaning 20 GB\u002Fs of uncompressed data translates to 5 GB\u002Fs of compressed data.",[342,848,849,850,855],{},"It's important to note that WarpStream’s pricing structure has fluctuated frequently throughout January. We observed the cost reported by their calculator changing from $409,644 per month to $337,068 per month. This variability has been previously highlighted in the blog post “",[55,851,854],{"href":852,"rel":853},"https:\u002F\u002Fbigdata.2minutestreaming.com\u002Fp\u002Fthe-brutal-truth-about-apache-kafka-cost-calculators",[264],"The Brutal Truth About Kafka Cost Calculators","”. To ensure transparency, we have documented the pricing as of January 29, 2025.",[48,857,858],{},[351,859],{"alt":18,"src":860},"\u002Fimgs\u002Fblogs\u002F679c602e42713e0028e9af5e_AD_4nXcu5_VWTLu9jRYs6zX1MBAOtLQEo5gyfNSWPcbpnQHXTa8qNCFAXezRR2E8daygzYTTwd4dhJjaLaLM8C6y_3OGbu2NS7pdvEv3a8-ptNKOg7AeKnYqPQCAYvQ5EuxzuI3JYIvY.png",[818,862,864],{"id":863},"msk","MSK",[339,866,867,870,873],{},[342,868,869],{},"EC2 (Server): 15 * $3.264\u002Fhr × 24 hr × 30 days = $35,251",[342,871,872],{},"Interzone Traffic (Client-Server): 5 GB\u002Fs × ⅔ × $0.02\u002FGB (in+out) × 3,600 s × 24 hr × 30 days = $172,800",[342,874,875],{},"Storage: 5 GB\u002Fs × $0.1\u002FGB-month × 3,600 s × 24 hr × 7 days * 3 replicas = $907,200",[818,877,731],{"id":878},"redpanda-1",[339,880,881,884,886,889,892],{},[342,882,883],{},"EC2 (Server): 9 × $1.536\u002Fhr × 24 hr × 30 days = $9953",[342,885,872],{},[342,887,888],{},"Interzone Traffic (Replication): 5 GB\u002Fs × 2 × $0.02\u002FGB (in+out) × 3,600 s × 24 hr × 30 days = $518,400",[342,890,891],{},"Storage: 5 GB\u002Fs × $0.045\u002FGB-month(st1) × 3,600 s × 24 hr × 7 days * 3 replicas = $408,240",[342,893,894],{},"Vendor Cost: $93,333 per month (based on limited information. See additional notes below).",[818,896,898],{"id":897},"additional-notes","Additional Notes",[339,900,901],{},[342,902,903,904,909],{},"Redpanda does not publicly disclose its BYOC pricing, making it difficult to accurately assess its total costs. We refer to information from the whitepaper “",[55,905,908],{"href":906,"rel":907},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.redpanda.com\u002Fresources\u002Fredpanda-vs-confluent-performance-tco-benchmark-report#form",[264],"Redpanda vs. Confluent: A Performance and TCO Benchmark Report by McKnight Consulting Group.","” for estimation purposes. Based on the Tier-8 pricing model in the whitepaper,  the estimated cost to support a 5GB\u002Fs workload would be $1.12 million per year ($93,333 per month). However, since this calculation is based on an estimation, we will revisit and refine the cost assessment once Redpanda publishes its BYOC pricing.",[48,911,912],{},[351,913],{"alt":18,"src":914},"\u002Fimgs\u002Fblogs\u002F679c602dc8a9859eed89a0ef_AD_4nXdbcO8vsNNPy4GtkNLlmNKf22fjxRvzLzH7CtOna1L08sTbvnZx3HhufeFqc1w4K2gEF7lxO2IR5supotxebAiGnA07Qa8Yr3Rd1pVK2LYKK4WurlJGwgdwwucZIFoF-N_2oBjY.png",[48,916,917],{},[351,918],{"alt":18,"src":919},"\u002Fimgs\u002Fblogs\u002F679c602d6bc1c2287e012540_AD_4nXfcHZnLfjbjIr3ZAgoQXT9dwP3aQCOQPmGZZJUtpNZSwE6qY6M3yehIaBxCwxEIeu5PVdUPY0zhyjnow26YfgjdYgSG4GnV9ibxu0YWTIpwng6z_F6FUGJMpERMKtpsFESzXSN_Sw.png",[339,921,922,925],{},[342,923,924],{},"When estimating the storage costs for Kafka and Redpanda, we assume the use of HDD storage at $0.045\u002FGB, based on the premise that both systems can fully utilize disk bandwidth without incurring the higher costs associated with GP2 or GP3 volumes. However, in practice, many users opt for GP2 or GP3, significantly increasing the total storage cost for Kafka and Redpanda.",[342,926,927],{},"Unlike disk-based solutions, S3 storage does not require capacity preallocation—Ursa only incurs costs for the actual data stored. This contrasts with Kafka and Redpanda, where preallocating storage can drive up expenses. As a result, the real-world storage costs for Kafka and Redpanda are often 50% higher than the estimates above.",[40,929,931],{"id":930},"conclusion","Conclusion",[48,933,934],{},"Ursa represents a transformative shift in streaming data infrastructure, offering cost efficiency, scalability, and flexibility without compromising durability or reliability. By leveraging a leaderless architecture and eliminating inter-zone data replication, Ursa reduces total cost of ownership by over 90% compared to traditional leader-based streaming engines like Kafka and Redpanda. Its direct integration with cloud storage and scalable metadata & index management via Oxia ensure high availability and simplified infrastructure management.",[32,936,938],{"id":937},"balancing-latency-and-cost","Balancing Latency and Cost",[48,940,941,945],{},[55,942,944],{"href":943},"\u002Fblog\u002Fcap-theorem-for-data-streaming","Ursa trades off slightly higher latency for ultra low cost",", making it an ideal choice for the majority of streaming workloads, especially those that prioritize throughput and cost savings over ultra-low latency. Meanwhile, StreamNative’s BookKeeper-based engine remains the preferred solution for real-time, latency-sensitive applications. By combining these two approaches, StreamNative empowers customers with the flexibility to choose the right engine for their specific needs—whether it's maximizing cost savings or achieving ultra low-latency real-time performance.",[32,947,949],{"id":948},"the-future-of-streaming-infrastructure","The Future of Streaming Infrastructure",[48,951,952],{},"In an era where data fuels AI, analytics, and real-time decision-making, managing infrastructure costs is critical to sustaining innovation. Ursa is not just a cost-cutting alternative—it is a forward-thinking, lakehouse-native platform that redefines how modern data streaming infrastructure should be built and operated.",[48,954,955,956,961],{},"Whether your priority is reducing costs, improving flexibility, or ingesting massive data into lakehouses, Ursa delivers a future-proof solution for the evolving demands of real-time data streaming. ",[55,957,960],{"href":958,"rel":959},"https:\u002F\u002Fconsole.streamnative.cloud\u002F",[264],"Get started"," with StreamNative Ursa today!",[963,964,966],"h1",{"id":965},"references","References",[48,968,969,972,973],{},[970,971,430],"span",{}," ",[55,974,975],{"href":975},"\u002Fblog\u002Fintroducing-oxia-scalable-metadata-and-coordination",[48,977,978,972,980],{},[970,979,379],{},[55,981,378],{"href":378},[48,983,984,972,987],{},[970,985,986],{},"StreamNative pricing",[55,988,989],{"href":989,"rel":990},"https:\u002F\u002Fdocs.streamnative.io\u002Fdocs\u002Fbilling-overview",[264],[48,992,993,972,996],{},[970,994,995],{},"WarpStream pricing",[55,997,998],{"href":998,"rel":999},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.warpstream.com\u002Fpricing#pricingfaqs",[264],[48,1001,1002,972,1005],{},[970,1003,1004],{},"AWS S3 pricing",[55,1006,1007],{"href":1007,"rel":1008},"https:\u002F\u002Faws.amazon.com\u002Fs3\u002Fpricing\u002F",[264],[48,1010,1011,972,1014],{},[970,1012,1013],{},"AWS EBS pricing",[55,1015,1016],{"href":1016,"rel":1017},"https:\u002F\u002Faws.amazon.com\u002Febs\u002Fpricing\u002F",[264],[48,1019,1020,972,1023],{},[970,1021,1022],{},"AWS MSK pricing",[55,1024,1025],{"href":1025,"rel":1026},"https:\u002F\u002Faws.amazon.com\u002Fmsk\u002Fpricing\u002F",[264],[48,1028,1029,972,1032],{},[970,1030,1031],{},"The Brutal Truth about Kafka Cost Calculators",[55,1033,852],{"href":852,"rel":1034},[264],[48,1036,1037,972,1040],{},[970,1038,1039],{},"Redpanda vs. Confluent: A Performance and TCO Benchmark Report by McKnight Consulting Group",[55,1041,906],{"href":906,"rel":1042},[264],{"title":18,"searchDepth":19,"depth":19,"links":1044},[1045,1046,1047,1052,1056,1057,1066,1069],{"id":333,"depth":19,"text":334},{"id":372,"depth":19,"text":373},{"id":397,"depth":19,"text":398,"children":1048},[1049,1050,1051],{"id":409,"depth":279,"text":410},{"id":434,"depth":279,"text":435},{"id":455,"depth":279,"text":456},{"id":479,"depth":19,"text":480,"children":1053},[1054,1055],{"id":483,"depth":279,"text":484},{"id":498,"depth":279,"text":499},{"id":539,"depth":19,"text":540},{"id":551,"depth":19,"text":552,"children":1058},[1059,1060,1061,1062,1063,1064,1065],{"id":558,"depth":279,"text":559},{"id":604,"depth":279,"text":605},{"id":622,"depth":279,"text":623},{"id":669,"depth":279,"text":670},{"id":697,"depth":279,"text":698},{"id":715,"depth":279,"text":716},{"id":730,"depth":279,"text":731},{"id":775,"depth":19,"text":776,"children":1067},[1068],{"id":815,"depth":279,"text":816},{"id":930,"depth":19,"text":931,"children":1070},[1071,1072],{"id":937,"depth":279,"text":938},{"id":948,"depth":279,"text":949},"StreamNative Cloud","2025-01-31","Discover how Ursa achieves 5GB\u002Fs Kafka workloads at just 5% of the cost of traditional streaming engines like Redpanda and AWS MSK. See our benchmark results comparing infrastructure costs, total cost of ownership (TCO), and performance across leading Kafka vendors.","\u002Fimgs\u002Fblogs\u002F679c6593d25099b1cdcec4ca_image-31.png",{},"\u002Fblog\u002Fhow-we-run-a-5-gb-s-kafka-workload-for-just-50-per-hour","30 min",{"title":308,"description":1075},"blog\u002Fhow-we-run-a-5-gb-s-kafka-workload-for-just-50-per-hour",[1083,1084,303],"TCO","Apache Kafka","CDUawvFKTs_AD8usvmIcTleU3mbfA0QAoPZM6xfVuo8",{"id":1087,"title":1088,"authors":1089,"body":1091,"canonicalUrl":289,"category":379,"createdAt":289,"date":1264,"description":1265,"extension":8,"featured":294,"image":1266,"isDraft":294,"link":289,"meta":1267,"navigation":7,"order":296,"path":1111,"readingTime":1268,"relatedResources":289,"seo":1269,"stem":1270,"tags":1271,"__hash__":1273},"blogs\u002Fblog\u002Fanatomy-of-a-stream-data-vs-metadata-vs-protocol.md","Anatomy of a Stream: Data vs Metadata vs Protocol",[1090,28],"Sijie Guo",{"type":15,"value":1092,"toc":1257},[1093,1096,1099,1131,1133,1136,1143,1146,1150,1153,1156,1159,1162,1165,1169,1172,1175,1178,1181,1184,1187,1191,1194,1197,1200,1203,1206,1209,1212,1216,1219,1230,1233,1236,1240,1243,1251,1254],[48,1094,1095],{},"Navigate the series — De-composing Streaming Systems:",[48,1097,1098],{},"This article is one chapter in a five-part deep dive into the future of real-time data. Explore the rest of the series here:",[339,1100,1101,1107,1113,1119,1125],{},[342,1102,1103],{},[55,1104,1106],{"href":1105},"\u002Fblog\u002Fwhy-streams-need-their-iceberg-moment","Part 1 — Why Streams Need Their Iceberg Moment",[342,1108,1109],{},[55,1110,1112],{"href":1111},"\u002Fblog\u002Fanatomy-of-a-stream-data-vs-metadata-vs-protocol","Part 2 — Anatomy of a Stream: Data vs Metadata vs Protocol",[342,1114,1115],{},[55,1116,1118],{"href":1117},"\u002Fblog\u002Finside-stream-format-a-table-for-infinite-logs","Part 3 — Inside Stream Format: A Table for Infinite Logs",[342,1120,1121],{},[55,1122,1124],{"href":1123},"\u002Fblog\u002Fcatalogs-for-streams-lessons-from-icebergs-rest-spec","Part 4 — Catalogs for Streams: Lessons from Iceberg’s REST Spec",[342,1126,1127],{},[55,1128,1130],{"href":1129},"\u002Fblog\u002Fbeyond-the-broker-standardizing-the-streaming-api","Part 5 — Beyond the Broker: Standardizing the Streaming API.",[208,1132],{},[48,1134,1135],{},"‍",[48,1137,1138,1139,1142],{},"In our previous post - ",[55,1140,1141],{"href":1105},"Why Streams Need Their Iceberg Moment",", we introduced the vision of a three-layer architecture for streaming systems inspired by the Apache Iceberg-fueled lakehouse revolution. Now, let’s dissect each of those layers in detail. How exactly do we separate a streaming system into data, metadata, and protocol, and what does each part do? In this deep dive, we’ll explore the anatomy of a stream through the lens of these three layers. We’ll also draw parallels to the lakehouse model (the separation of table storage, table metadata, and query engine) to solidify the concepts.",[48,1144,1145],{},"Modern streaming platforms can be reimagined as three cooperative components:",[40,1147,1149],{"id":1148},"_1-the-data-layer-stream-storage-reimagined","1. The Data Layer: Stream Storage Reimagined",[48,1151,1152],{},"What it is: The data layer is responsible for storing the actual events\u002Fmessages that flow through streams. In a traditional broker, this corresponds to the log files on disk (e.g. Kafka’s segment files or Pulsar’s BookKeeper ledgers). In the new layered model, the data layer is broken out as an independent, stream storage service or medium.",[48,1154,1155],{},"Today’s situation: In Kafka’s classic design, each broker stores segments of the log on its local filesystem, and brokers replicate these segments to each other for fault tolerance. Apache Pulsar took a different approach by using Apache BookKeeper bookies as a distributed storage cluster for logs, separate from the broker that handles clients. Pulsar’s architecture was an early step toward decoupling: the broker became stateless for data, and storage responsibilities were offloaded to bookies. However, even BookKeeper clusters have their own disks and replication to manage, and the data is in a proprietary format not directly queryable by external analytics engines. Most streaming stacks still treat stored data as ephemeral: something to keep around for a retention period and then drop or offload elsewhere for analysis.",[48,1157,1158],{},"The new approach: In a truly disaggregated data layer, stream data lives in a scalable, low-cost store that can retain data indefinitely and make it accessible beyond just the streaming consumers. The prime candidate for this is cloud object storage (like Amazon S3, Google Cloud Storage, etc.) or a distributed file system, combined with an open file format. Instead of brokers writing to local disk, imagine that when a producer sends an event, it gets persisted directly into an “open table” format file on S3 (or a similar store). For example, a stream’s data could be stored as a set of Parquet files in a directory, or as append-only files following a format that external readers understand. This is analogous to how Iceberg stores table data as files in object storage. The data layer would handle chunking and writing events in an efficient way (perhaps buffering in memory and writing larger blocks, similar to how columnar file formats work). It would also handle replication or durability – with cloud storage, replication is often built-in (multi-AZ redundancy), so we avoid the cost of triple-replicating at the application level.",[48,1160,1161],{},"A key benefit of this approach is “streaming data = lakehouse data”. The moment an event is written, it’s not only available to stream consumers, but it’s also sitting in an analytics-friendly store. Your streaming history is your data lake. This eliminates the need for separate ETL processes to copy data from a message queue into data lake storage. Anyone with access to the storage (and proper permissions) could run SQL queries or AI model training on the live data, using tools like Spark or Flink, because it’s already in an accessible format. In practice, there will be indexes or additional metadata to help readers efficiently find their position in the stream (e.g. an index mapping offsets to file ranges), but those are part of the metadata layer (covered next).",[48,1163,1164],{},"Challenges and considerations: Decoupling storage like this raises questions about latency and throughput. Directly writing to object storage can introduce higher latency than writing to a local disk due to network hops. However, there are ways to mitigate this: use caching for hot data, memory buffers, and perhaps a tiered approach (write immediately to a WAL in memory or fast storage, then flush asynchronously to S3). Many systems (including StreamNative Ursa) use such tricks to get the best of both worlds – the durability of object storage with the latency of fast storage. Another consideration is format: should streams be stored as pure log (sequence of events) or also translated into columnar formats for efficiency? Projects like Apache Iceberg are exploring streaming ingest, where streams of inserts can continuously produce new table files, so the line between “stream” and “table” blurs. Regardless of implementation details, the data layer’s overarching role is clear: keep all the data safe and accessible, decoupled from the serving compute. This layer can be scaled by simply adding storage capacity (or letting the cloud storage scale automatically), independent of how many clients or how much compute power is needed to serve the data.",[40,1166,1168],{"id":1167},"_2-the-metadata-layer-the-stream-catalog-and-brain","2. The Metadata Layer: The Stream Catalog and Brain",[48,1170,1171],{},"What it is: The metadata layer manages all the information about the streams – their definitions, the location of data, the consumer positions, and any coordination needed. Think of it as the catalog or meta-store for streaming data. In databases, this would be your system tables or Hive Metastore; in Iceberg’s world, it’s the catalog services that track table schema and snapshots.",[48,1173,1174],{},"Today’s situation: In current streaming systems, metadata is often entangled with the brokers or tied to external systems like ZooKeeper. For example, Kafka (pre-KIP-500) stored partition assignments, leader election, and consumer group offsets in ZooKeeper (and later in internal topics on brokers). The metadata about what topics exist, how many partitions, who is the leader, etc., was spread across ZK and the brokers’ memory\u002Fstate. Pulsar, on the other hand, uses a pluggable metadata store (like ZooKeeper, Etcd, or Oxia) to store metadata about topics, cursors (subscriptions), and so forth. This means scaling or changing how metadata is handled can be as complex as the data scaling problem itself. A lot of the “complexity” of running a Kafka cluster, for instance, has historically been about managing this metadata: ensuring ZooKeeper is healthy, performing controlled leader elections, and recently, migrating to the new Kafka Raft metadata quorum (as ZooKeeper is phased out). The bottom line is that metadata hasn’t been a first-class, independent component – it’s been tightly linked to the runtime of the streaming cluster.",[48,1176,1177],{},"The new approach: In a three-layer design, the metadata layer is a dedicated, standalone service or set of services that act as the source of truth for stream state. We can envision it as a Stream Catalog analogous to an Iceberg catalog. It would hold information like: a list of all streams (topics) and their configurations, schemas for each stream (if using schema registry integration), the mapping of stream partitions to data files or objects in the data layer, and consumer group offsets or positions (i.e., where each consumer has read up to). Essentially, any piece of information needed to coordinate producers and consumers lives here, rather than being implicitly known by a broker process.",[48,1179,1180],{},"Designing this layer brings questions: Do we implement it as a highly-available database? As a set of metadata files on the same object storage (like how Iceberg maintains a metadata JSON and manifest lists)? The answer could be either or a mix. One promising pattern is to leverage the same tech as the lakehouse: for instance, one could treat each stream as akin to an Iceberg table internally – with snapshots pointing to new data files, etc. In fact, if the data layer writes Parquet files for a stream, an Iceberg table’s metadata could naturally catalog those files. However, streaming has extra needs (like real-time consumer offsets and perhaps event time indexes) that might extend beyond a static table definition. It might be that the metadata layer uses a lightweight distributed consensus system (e.g., etcd or a Raft-based service) to manage monotonically increasing sequences for offsets and to manage subscribers. The key is that brokers (protocol servers) consult this metadata service rather than owning that knowledge exclusively.",[48,1182,1183],{},"Benefits: By isolating metadata, we gain clarity and consistency. Multiple protocol servers can all refer to one canonical source of truth, ensuring they behave consistently. It also improves governance and interoperability: a well-defined catalog of streams could be exposed via standard APIs. Imagine being able to query the streaming metadata layer to discover what streams exist and their schema, just like you’d query an Iceberg Catalog for available tables. This makes it easier to integrate streaming data with other systems – for example, an ETL job could use the catalog to find the latest snapshot of a stream, or an auditor could verify all streams comply with certain retention policies. Another boon is independent scaling and tuning: the metadata store can be optimized for high-write, low-latency operations (like committing a new event sequence or updating a consumer offset) and scaled out with consensus nodes, without touching the data path or client handling logic. If the volume of streams or consumer groups grows, we beef up the metadata service accordingly, without needing to muck with the storage layer.",[48,1185,1186],{},"Iceberg again provides a guiding analogy: Iceberg’s metadata layer (its catalogs and metadata files) enabled features like time travel, schema evolution, and concurrent writes in the batch world. A robust streaming metadata layer could similarly enable new stream features – think seal\u002Funseal of streams, consistent replay from points in time (since the metadata could mark snapshots of a stream at intervals), or even transactions across streams. It becomes the brain that coordinates complex behaviors that would be very hard to bolt onto a monolithic broker. As a bonus, if the metadata is stored in a standardized way (say, using Iceberg’s format for log segments), external systems might even read it to understand stream contents or hook streaming data into data lineage tools.",[40,1188,1190],{"id":1189},"_3-the-protocol-layer-pluggable-brokers-and-interfaces","3. The Protocol Layer: Pluggable Brokers and Interfaces",[48,1192,1193],{},"What it is: The protocol layer is what the outside world interacts with – it’s the API and the delivery mechanism for streaming data. In simple terms, these are the servers that clients connect to using some protocol (e.g., the Kafka binary protocol, REST, MQTT, etc.). Their job is to accept data from producers, serve data to consumers, and enforce the semantics of the streaming system (ordering guarantees, acknowledgments, subscription management). In a traditional architecture this is tightly bound to the storage – the broker both speaks the protocol and writes to disk. Here, we split it out: the protocol layer’s components speak the language of streaming but delegate actual data persistence and state to the other layers.",[48,1195,1196],{},"Today’s situation: Kafka’s protocol is quite complex but well-understood; clients talk to specific broker hosts which handle both the network IO and disk IO for partitions they lead. Scaling the throughput means scaling brokers since they do all the work. If you want a different interface (say an HTTP API for Kafka topics), you typically need a separate bridge that still ultimately talks to the Kafka brokers. Pulsar took a step here by supporting multiple protocols (via protocol handlers) – Pulsar brokers can natively understand not just the Pulsar protocol but also MQTT or Kafka (with a plugin), translating those calls to the Pulsar core. That hints at what could be possible if the protocol handling was more modular. But even in Pulsar, the broker is still where data lives (in memory until written to bookies) and where subscription cursors update, etc., so it’s not fully isolated.",[48,1198,1199],{},"The new approach: In the three-layer model, the protocol servers are stateless or near-stateless. They can be thought of as edge servers or API gateways to the streaming system. Their responsibilities would include: handling client connections, implementing the nuances of a protocol (e.g. Kafka’s fetch and produce requests, or Pulsar’s subscribe and flow control commands), orchestrating data flow between clients and the data layer, and making calls to the metadata layer for coordination (like finding out where the latest data for a topic is, or updating a consumer’s position). Crucially, these protocol nodes do not store the full stream data on local disk (except perhaps a cache); they don’t have exclusive ownership of a partition’s data. Instead, they might temporarily cache recent messages for speed, but the authoritative storage is the data layer. In case of a failure, any other protocol node can take over serving a given client, because all the state it needs (what data has been written, where to find it, what the consumer offset is) is in the data and metadata layers.",[48,1201,1202],{},"This design means you could have multiple different protocol services running in parallel. For example, you might run a set of “Kafka API servers” that let Kafka clients produce\u002Fconsume to\u002Ffrom the streams, and alongside them a set of “Pulsar API servers” for applications using Pulsar’s features – both accessing the same underlying streams. Because these servers are stateless, you can scale out each type as needed – if you have 1000 Kafka clients and only 10 Pulsar clients, you deploy more of the Kafka protocol instances. The streaming system thus speaks many languages without duplicating the data.",[48,1204,1205],{},"Benefits: The protocol layer being separate yields immediate flexibility. Adopting new protocols or client standards becomes much easier – you don’t need to overhaul how data is stored, you just stand up a new front-end. It’s similar to how in databases, you might add new query endpoints (like a REST API to an SQL database) without changing the storage engine. Another benefit is resilience and elasticity: since these nodes keep no critical data, you can auto-scale them based on traffic patterns (spin up more during peak ingest times, scale down in off hours), all without migrating any stored data. If one crashes or needs maintenance, you remove it from the load balancer and traffic seamlessly flows to others. No more worrying that a broker failure means data might be temporarily unavailable – as long as some protocol node is up, it can retrieve data from storage and serve it.",[48,1207,1208],{},"Ordering and consistency: One might wonder, how do we preserve ordering guarantees or consistency if any stateless server can serve data? The answer lies in smart coordination via the metadata layer. The system might still elect a “leader” for a partition but that leader’s role is just to coordinate writes (to ensure ordering) – it could be one of the protocol nodes assigned dynamically, or the data layer itself could enforce ordering (e.g., an object store might allow appends in order via a lock). There are multiple ways to implement it. The key is, even if a particular node is leader for a partition’s writes, that leadership can be quickly handed off if needed (since no long-lived data lives on the leader). This is, in fact, how Pulsar’s design is imagined: brokers handle ordering and act as a “cache & coordinator” while the data lives on an external log storage like Apache BookKeeper. So we still ensure that each partition’s events are delivered in order – the clients don’t directly all write to storage concurrently; they go through a protocol node which sequences them. But unlike the old model, that node doesn’t own the data forever – once written, the data is on durable storage and any node can read it.",[48,1210,1211],{},"To draw an analogy, consider a content delivery network (CDN) for websites: the CDN edge servers don’t store the master copy of the website content; they cache and serve it, while the origin server (storage) holds the source of truth. In our streaming case, the protocol layer are like those edge servers, and the data layer is the origin. It’s a pattern proven to work for scaling web content to millions of users – now we are applying it to event streams.",[40,1213,1215],{"id":1214},"from-lakehouse-to-lakestream-comparing-the-layers","From Lakehouse to Lakestream: Comparing the Layers",[48,1217,1218],{},"It’s worth explicitly comparing this three-layer streaming model to the lakehouse (Iceberg) model to cement the understanding:",[339,1220,1221,1224,1227],{},[342,1222,1223],{},"Data Layer: In a lakehouse, this is the object store with parquet\u002Forc files containing table data. In streaming, it’s a durable log store (ideally also an object store or distributed FS) holding event data. Both serve as the single source of truth for raw data. The difference is streams are continually appending, whereas tables see batches of appends\u002Fupdates – but conceptually, it’s analogous.",[342,1225,1226],{},"Metadata Layer: In the lakehouse, this is Iceberg’s table metadata (manifest files, snapshots, and the catalog service like Hive Metastore or Glue) which tracks where data files are and what the schema is. In streaming, the metadata layer tracks active topics\u002Fpartitions, where the latest offset is, who the leader is (if using leaders), and consumer read positions. Both provide transactional metadata that can be updated atomically (commit a new snapshot or commit an event sequence).",[342,1228,1229],{},"Protocol\u002FCompute Layer: In the lakehouse world, this is the query engine or processing engine – Spark, Trino, Flink, etc. They read data via the metadata layer and compute results. In streaming, the protocol servers are like a continuously running “query” that pulls data for consumers or ingests from producers. They are the compute layer that interfaces with clients. One could even view a streaming consumer as analogous to a continuous query over the data layer. The protocol layer ensures that the continuous queries (subscriptions) get the right data in the right order, just as a batch query engine ensures a SQL query reads the right snapshot of a table.",[48,1231,1232],{},"The separation of concerns is remarkably parallel. By adopting this layered approach, streaming systems become “lakestreams” – first-class real-time data streaming stores that maintain the openness and reliability of a lakehouse. We can use the term lakestream to denote a streaming system built with the same architectural ideals as a data lakehouse.",[48,1234,1235],{},"\"Lakestream\" is preferred over \"streamhouse\" or \"streaming lakehouse\" to denote an architecture that stores a single copy of data for both streams and tables, unlike many \"streaming lakehouse\" concepts, which maintain two separate copies.",[40,1237,1239],{"id":1238},"conclusion-embracing-the-modular-future-of-streaming","Conclusion: Embracing the Modular Future of Streaming",[48,1241,1242],{},"Decomposing streams into Data, Metadata, and Protocol layers is more than an academic exercise – it’s a blueprint for the next generation of streaming infrastructure. This approach addresses the core pain points we outlined in part 1: high costs drop when you utilize object storage and stateless scaling; slow evolution flips to rapid innovation when each layer can change independently; operational burdens lighten when state is centralized and immutable in storage, rather than spread across dozens of servers.",[48,1244,1245,1246,1250],{},"We’re already seeing early implementations of this vision. Apache Pulsar’s design validated the benefits of splitting storage from serving, and it’s evolving further to remove even more coupling (e.g., eliminating ZooKeeper, integrating with tiered storage). Newer platforms like ",[55,1247,1249],{"href":1248},"\u002Fproducts\u002Fursa","StreamNative’s Ursa"," are pushing the envelope by combining the Kafka API with a lakehouse storage foundation – essentially an embodiment of the three-layer idea: protocol flexibility, a unified stream\u002Ftable storage, and a separate metadata store. All these efforts, from open-source projects to cloud services, point in the same direction: streams are becoming cloud-native and open.",[48,1252,1253],{},"For CTOs and engineering leaders, the message is clear. To stay ahead in a world of real-time data and AI, it’s time to rethink your streaming architecture. Just as you wouldn’t build a data lake today without an open table format and a separation of compute\u002Fstorage, soon we’ll consider it equally antiquated to build streaming systems on a 2010s-style monolithic broker. The three-layer “Iceberg moment” for streams will mean your data infrastructure is more interoperable, future-proof, and cost-efficient. It will enable use cases like instant replays of years of event history, on-the-fly stream processing with SQL engines, and streaming analytics that seamlessly blend historical and real-time data. And crucially, this can be achieved in a vendor-neutral way – through open standards for stream storage and metadata, and widely adopted protocols.",[48,1255,1256],{},"In conclusion, the anatomy of a modern stream is one of independence and unity: independent layers each doing one job well, and a unified vision of data that transcends the old batch vs streaming divide. By embracing this architecture, we stand to unlock the full potential of streaming data, much as the lakehouse did for batch data. The iceberg has shown us only the tip of what’s possible – now it’s up to us to complete the picture for streaming.",{"title":18,"searchDepth":19,"depth":19,"links":1258},[1259,1260,1261,1262,1263],{"id":1148,"depth":19,"text":1149},{"id":1167,"depth":19,"text":1168},{"id":1189,"depth":19,"text":1190},{"id":1214,"depth":19,"text":1215},{"id":1238,"depth":19,"text":1239},"2025-07-03","Explore a three-layer architecture for modern streaming systems, separating data, metadata, and protocol to achieve flexibility, resilience, and cost-efficiency, inspired by the lakehouse model.","\u002Fimgs\u002Fblogs\u002F68667c08574e70fbb7600ea3_anatomy-of-a-stream.png",{},"8 min read",{"title":1088,"description":1265},"blog\u002Fanatomy-of-a-stream-data-vs-metadata-vs-protocol",[1272,379],"Lakehouse","u8gv3M-HCzC4oRhX9ya_voxdPL58Q5vXVtRpaqNb-bo",[1275,1291],{"id":1276,"title":1090,"bioSummary":1277,"email":289,"extension":8,"image":1278,"linkedinUrl":1279,"meta":1280,"position":1287,"stem":1288,"twitterUrl":1289,"__hash__":1290},"authors\u002Fauthors\u002Fsijie-guo.md","Sijie’s journey with Apache Pulsar began at Yahoo! where he was part of the team working to develop a global messaging platform for the company. He then went to Twitter, where he led the messaging infrastructure group and co-created DistributedLog and Twitter EventBus. In 2017, he co-founded Streamlio, which was acquired by Splunk, and in 2019 he founded StreamNative. He is one of the original creators of Apache Pulsar and Apache BookKeeper, and remains VP of Apache BookKeeper and PMC Member of Apache Pulsar. Sijie lives in the San Francisco Bay Area of California.","\u002Fimgs\u002Fauthors\u002Fsijie-guo.webp","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.linkedin.com\u002Fin\u002Fsijieg\u002F",{"body":1281},{"type":15,"value":1282,"toc":1285},[1283],[48,1284,1277],{},{"title":18,"searchDepth":19,"depth":19,"links":1286},[],"CEO and Co-Founder, StreamNative, Apache Pulsar PMC Member","authors\u002Fsijie-guo","https:\u002F\u002Ftwitter.com\u002Fsijieg","krzMgsbADqGZT1TnpWTVzT4HJ9U7oZB9hzOMiDT5Wd0",{"id":1292,"title":28,"bioSummary":1293,"email":289,"extension":8,"image":1294,"linkedinUrl":1295,"meta":1296,"position":1304,"stem":1305,"twitterUrl":289,"__hash__":1306},"authors\u002Fauthors\u002Fdavid-kjerrumgaard.md","David is a Principal Sales Engineer and former Developer Advocate for StreamNative. He has over 15 years of experience working with open source projects in the Big Data, Stream Processing, and Distributed Computing spaces. David is the author of Pulsar in Action.","\u002Fimgs\u002Fauthors\u002Fdavid-kjerrumgaard.webp","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.linkedin.com\u002Fin\u002Fdavidkj\u002F",{"body":1297},{"type":15,"value":1298,"toc":1302},[1299],[48,1300,1301],{},"David is a Sales Engineer and former Developer Advocate for StreamNative with a focus on helping developers solve their streaming data challenges using Apache Pulsar. He has over 15 years of experience working with open source projects in the Big Data, Stream Processing, and Distributed Computing spaces. David is the author of the book Pulsar in Action.",{"title":18,"searchDepth":19,"depth":19,"links":1303},[],"Principal Sales Engineer, StreamNative","authors\u002Fdavid-kjerrumgaard","-X5RI2tEofWI91uNkN4IduxJbMIoSTqxTinSYCBJcUw",[1308,1316,1321],{"path":1309,"title":1310,"date":1311,"image":1312,"link":-1,"collection":1313,"resourceType":1314,"score":1315,"id":1309},"\u002Fblog\u002Fursa-everywhere-lakehouse-native-future-data-streaming","Ursa Everywhere: Paving the Path to a Lakehouse-Native Future for Data Streaming","2025-09-30","\u002Fimgs\u002Fblogs\u002F68db7b1670511318e32f31dd_Ursa-every-where_no-logo.png","blogs","Blog",1,{"path":1117,"title":1317,"date":1318,"image":1319,"link":-1,"collection":1313,"resourceType":1314,"score":1320,"id":1117},"Inside Stream Format: A Table for Infinite Logs","2025-07-10","\u002Fimgs\u002Fblogs\u002F686f4b318f8b4fbe732e7dc9_inside-stream-format.png",0.667,{"path":1322,"title":1323,"date":1324,"image":1325,"link":-1,"collection":1313,"resourceType":1314,"score":1320,"id":1322},"\u002Fblog\u002Fstreamnative-expands-unitycatalog-integration-with-iceberg-tables","StreamNative Expands Unity Catalog Integration with Managed Iceberg Tables","2025-06-12","\u002Fimgs\u002Fblogs\u002F684ab726ad20a9327e4b907b_image-16.png",1776256517271]