Pulsar vs. Kafka
Pulsar provides a multi-layer architecture that decouples storage and compute. Pulsar’s design allows organizations to elastically scale storage independently from compute and achieve different levels of resource isolation.
In contrast, Kafka has a monolithic architecture that tightly couples compute and storage, where resources must be scaled together.
Pulsar vs. Kafka performance
In our 2022 test, we found that, on identical servers, Pulsar outperformed Kafka significantly.
Download the benchmark to read the full test results.
See full reportMaximum throughput
Pulsar is able to achieve 2.5x the maximum throughput compared to Kafka
Lower Publish latency
Pulsar provides consistent single-digit publish latency that is 100x lower than Kafka
Faster
Pulsar has a historical read rate that is 1.5x faster than Kafka
Related resources
Kafka applications can run on Pulsar
StreamNative Cloud supports the native Apache Kafka protocol on Pulsar brokers. It means you can migrate your existing Kafka applications and services to Pulsar without modifying the code. This enables Kafka applications to leverage Pulsar’s powerful capabilities.
Learn more →
Enterprise-grade
multi-tenancy
Rebalance-free scaling
Tiered storage retention
Related resources
Why consider Pulsar?
From its early days, Apache Pulsar was designed to address the limitations of Apache Kafka, especially in a cloud-native environment. There are several reasons to choose Pulsar over Kafka, including:
Rationalize your infrastructure and reduce your costs
Advanced features such as multitenancy, georeplication or infinite storage
Scale clusters dynamically without downtime
Consistent low latencies and high throughput
Messaging use cases, like worker queues or event-driven applications
Related resources
Pulsar vs. Kafka features comparison
Apache Pulsar vs. Apache Kafka: Which streaming technology is right for you?
.svg)
Want to learn more?
Drop us a line. We'd love to chat.