Pulsar vs. Kafka: A More Accurate Perspective from Use Cases and Community to Features and Performance

Download and review our white paper for an in-depth look at the comparison between Pulsar and Kafka.

StreamNative is a global team of knowledgeable experts in Apache Pulsar, Apache BookKeeper, and messaging and streaming.

If you have any questions or suggestions, click here to send us an email directly. We’ll reply to you as soon as possible.

Executive Summary

The shift to real-time streaming technologies has bolstered the adoption of Pulsar and there has been a marked increase in both the interest and adoption of Pulsar in 2020. With Pulsar being sought out by companies developing messaging and event-streaming applications — from Fortune 100 companies to forward-thinking start-ups — and so much growth around the Pulsar project, it has garnered a lot of recent press and attention.

Pulsar offers many advantages that make it an attractive choice for companies seeking to adopt a unified messaging and event streaming platform. Compared with Kafka, Pulsar is more resilient and less complex to operate and scale and it covers all the fundamentals necessary for building event streaming applications and incorporates many built-in features with a rich set of tools.

In this blog, we compare Pulsar and Kafka in terms of performance, architecture, and features to help you make an informed decision.

Start streaming with Apache Pulsar on StreamNative Cloud

© StreamNative, Inc. 2021Apache, Apache Pulsar, Apache BookKeeper, Apache Flink, and associated open source project names are trademarks of the Apache Software Foundation.TermsPrivacy