StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. Utilities
  3. Background Jobs
  4. Message Queue
  5. Apache Ignite vs Kafka

Apache Ignite vs Kafka

OverviewDecisionsComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Kafka
Kafka
Stacks24.2K
Followers22.3K
Votes607
GitHub Stars31.2K
Forks14.8K
Apache Ignite
Apache Ignite
Stacks110
Followers168
Votes41
GitHub Stars5.0K
Forks1.9K

Apache Ignite vs Kafka: What are the differences?

Introduction:

Apache Ignite and Apache Kafka are both popular distributed streaming platforms, but they have distinct features and use cases. Here are the key differences between Apache Ignite and Kafka.

  1. Data Processing Paradigm: Apache Ignite is an in-memory data processing platform that provides distributed caching, compute grid, and streaming capabilities. It allows for real-time data processing, analytics, and high-performance transactions. On the other hand, Apache Kafka is a distributed streaming platform that handles real-time data streams and provides a scalable, fault-tolerant, and distributed publish-subscribe messaging system.

  2. Data Structure: Apache Ignite provides a key-value store or an SQL-like API to work with its in-memory data processing platform. It supports distributed data structures like key-value pairs, SQL tables, and integrated file systems. In contrast, Apache Kafka is based on a distributed commit log and primarily uses the publish-subscribe model. It organizes data into topics and partitions, and each topic can have multiple subscribers.

  3. Data Persistence: Apache Ignite supports both in-memory and disk-based persistence. It allows users to configure data storage and eviction policies, ensuring data resiliency and durability. Apache Kafka, on the other hand, is designed for high-throughput streaming and does not persist data in the traditional sense. Kafka retains data for a configurable period of time but does not provide persistent storage beyond that.

  4. Data Synchronization: Apache Ignite allows for real-time data synchronization across multiple nodes with its distributed caching capabilities. It provides the ability to share stateful data consistently and transparently, ensuring data integrity. In contrast, Apache Kafka uses a publish-subscribe model, where producers publish data to topics, and subscribers consume data from topics asynchronously. Data synchronization in Kafka is achieved through the commit log and message replay.

  5. Message Processing: Apache Ignite supports complex event processing (CEP) and SQL queries on the streaming data. It provides a rich set of APIs and tools to process and analyze streaming data in real-time. On the other hand, Apache Kafka focuses on handling high-volume, real-time event streams efficiently. Kafka's strength lies in its ability to handle millions of messages per second, making it suitable for use cases like log aggregation, event sourcing, and stream processing.

  6. Integration with External Systems: Apache Ignite is designed to work as a unified in-memory computing platform and can integrate with various external systems like SQL databases, NoSQL databases, Hadoop, and machine learning frameworks. It provides connectors and data loaders for seamless integration. Apache Kafka, on the other hand, integrates well with other big data processing frameworks like Apache Spark, Apache Storm, and Apache Flink. Kafka acts as a reliable and scalable data pipeline between systems, enabling real-time streaming analytics.

In summary, Apache Ignite focuses on in-memory data processing, caching, and real-time analytics, while Apache Kafka is a distributed streaming platform optimized for high-throughput, fault-tolerant messaging and streaming data processing.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs
CLI (Node.js)
or
Manual

Advice on Kafka, Apache Ignite

viradiya
viradiya

Apr 12, 2020

Needs adviceonAngularJSAngularJSASP.NET CoreASP.NET CoreMSSQLMSSQL

We are going to develop a microservices-based application. It consists of AngularJS, ASP.NET Core, and MSSQL.

We have 3 types of microservices. Emailservice, Filemanagementservice, Filevalidationservice

I am a beginner in microservices. But I have read about RabbitMQ, but come to know that there are Redis and Kafka also in the market. So, I want to know which is best.

933k views933k
Comments
Ishfaq
Ishfaq

Feb 28, 2020

Needs advice

Our backend application is sending some external messages to a third party application at the end of each backend (CRUD) API call (from UI) and these external messages take too much extra time (message building, processing, then sent to the third party and log success/failure), UI application has no concern to these extra third party messages.

So currently we are sending these third party messages by creating a new child thread at end of each REST API call so UI application doesn't wait for these extra third party API calls.

I want to integrate Apache Kafka for these extra third party API calls, so I can also retry on failover third party API calls in a queue(currently third party messages are sending from multiple threads at the same time which uses too much processing and resources) and logging, etc.

Question 1: Is this a use case of a message broker?

Question 2: If it is then Kafka vs RabitMQ which is the better?

804k views804k
Comments
Roman
Roman

Senior Back-End Developer, Software Architect

Feb 12, 2019

ReviewonKafkaKafka

I use Kafka because it has almost infinite scaleability in terms of processing events (could be scaled to process hundreds of thousands of events), great monitoring (all sorts of metrics are exposed via JMX).

Downsides of using Kafka are:

  • you have to deal with Zookeeper
  • you have to implement advanced routing yourself (compared to RabbitMQ it has no advanced routing)
10.9k views10.9k
Comments

Detailed Comparison

Kafka
Kafka
Apache Ignite
Apache Ignite

Kafka is a distributed, partitioned, replicated commit log service. It provides the functionality of a messaging system, but with a unique design.

It is a memory-centric distributed database, caching, and processing platform for transactional, analytical, and streaming workloads delivering in-memory speeds at petabyte scale

Written at LinkedIn in Scala;Used by LinkedIn to offload processing of all page and other views;Defaults to using persistence, uses OS disk cache for hot data (has higher throughput then any of the above having persistence enabled);Supports both on-line as off-line processing
Memory-Centric Storage; Distributed SQL; Distributed Key-Value
Statistics
GitHub Stars
31.2K
GitHub Stars
5.0K
GitHub Forks
14.8K
GitHub Forks
1.9K
Stacks
24.2K
Stacks
110
Followers
22.3K
Followers
168
Votes
607
Votes
41
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 126
    High-throughput
  • 119
    Distributed
  • 92
    Scalable
  • 86
    High-Performance
  • 66
    Durable
Cons
  • 32
    Non-Java clients are second-class citizens
  • 29
    Needs Zookeeper
  • 9
    Operational difficulties
  • 5
    Terrible Packaging
Pros
  • 5
    High Avaliability
  • 5
    Free
  • 5
    Written in java. runs on jvm
  • 5
    Multiple client language support
  • 4
    Load balancing
Integrations
No integrations available
MongoDB
MongoDB
MySQL
MySQL
Apache Spark
Apache Spark

What are some alternatives to Kafka, Apache Ignite?

Redis

Redis

Redis is an open source (BSD licensed), in-memory data structure store, used as a database, cache, and message broker. Redis provides data structures such as strings, hashes, lists, sets, sorted sets with range queries, bitmaps, hyperloglogs, geospatial indexes, and streams.

RabbitMQ

RabbitMQ

RabbitMQ gives your applications a common platform to send and receive messages, and your messages a safe place to live until received.

Celery

Celery

Celery is an asynchronous task queue/job queue based on distributed message passing. It is focused on real-time operation, but supports scheduling as well.

Amazon SQS

Amazon SQS

Transmit any volume of data, at any level of throughput, without losing messages or requiring other services to be always available. With SQS, you can offload the administrative burden of operating and scaling a highly available messaging cluster, while paying a low price for only what you use.

NSQ

NSQ

NSQ is a realtime distributed messaging platform designed to operate at scale, handling billions of messages per day. It promotes distributed and decentralized topologies without single points of failure, enabling fault tolerance and high availability coupled with a reliable message delivery guarantee. See features & guarantees.

ActiveMQ

ActiveMQ

Apache ActiveMQ is fast, supports many Cross Language Clients and Protocols, comes with easy to use Enterprise Integration Patterns and many advanced features while fully supporting JMS 1.1 and J2EE 1.4. Apache ActiveMQ is released under the Apache 2.0 License.

ZeroMQ

ZeroMQ

The 0MQ lightweight messaging kernel is a library which extends the standard socket interfaces with features traditionally provided by specialised messaging middleware products. 0MQ sockets provide an abstraction of asynchronous message queues, multiple messaging patterns, message filtering (subscriptions), seamless access to multiple transport protocols and more.

Apache NiFi

Apache NiFi

An easy to use, powerful, and reliable system to process and distribute data. It supports powerful and scalable directed graphs of data routing, transformation, and system mediation logic.

Hazelcast

Hazelcast

With its various distributed data structures, distributed caching capabilities, elastic nature, memcache support, integration with Spring and Hibernate and more importantly with so many happy users, Hazelcast is feature-rich, enterprise-ready and developer-friendly in-memory data grid solution.

Aerospike

Aerospike

Aerospike is an open-source, modern database built from the ground up to push the limits of flash storage, processors and networks. It was designed to operate with predictable low latency at high throughput with uncompromising reliability – both high availability and ACID guarantees.

Related Comparisons

Bootstrap
Materialize

Bootstrap vs Materialize

Laravel
Django

Django vs Laravel vs Node.js

Bootstrap
Foundation

Bootstrap vs Foundation vs Material UI

Node.js
Spring Boot

Node.js vs Spring-Boot

Liquibase
Flyway

Flyway vs Liquibase