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. Mosca vs Mosquitto

Mosca vs Mosquitto

OverviewComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Mosquitto
Mosquitto
Stacks136
Followers306
Votes14
Mosca
Mosca
Stacks16
Followers43
Votes0

Mosca vs Mosquitto: What are the differences?

Introduction

In the realm of Internet of Things (IoT) development, Mosca and Mosquitto are two widely used messaging broker implementations. While both Mosca and Mosquitto serve the purpose of enabling communication between IoT devices, they have key differences that set them apart. In this Markdown-formatted code, we will explore and highlight these differences between Mosca and Mosquitto.

  1. Architecture: Mosca is built on top of the Node.js platform, using JavaScript as its primary language. On the other hand, Mosquitto is an MQTT broker implemented in C, making it leaner and lighter in terms of resource usage and performance.

  2. Ease of Use: Mosca provides a more intuitive and developer-friendly API, offering extensive documentation and examples for easy integration into Node.js projects. On the contrary, Mosquitto requires more advanced technical skills due to its lower-level C implementation, making it less accessible for beginners.

  3. Scalability: In terms of scalability, Mosca's architecture is built to handle a high number of connections and messages. It can easily be scaled horizontally to accommodate larger IoT deployments. Mosquitto, while also capable of handling a significant number of connections, may require more manual configuration and optimization for optimal scalability.

  4. Configuration Options: Mosquitto offers a wide array of configuration options, allowing fine-grained control over various aspects such as security, logging, and ACL (access control list). Mosca, on the other hand, provides more simplified configuration options, which may be ideal for simpler setups or rapid prototyping.

  5. Community and Support: Mosquitto has a larger and more established community, as it has been around for a longer period of time and is an Eclipse project. This results in more frequent updates, bug fixes, and a broader knowledge base. Mosca, while also having an active community, may have fewer contributors and resources available.

  6. Integration with Other Technologies: Mosca integrates seamlessly with the Node.js ecosystem, allowing easy integration with popular frameworks and tools. Mosquitto, being implemented in C, can be integrated into a wider range of platforms and programming languages, making it a versatile choice in heterogenous IoT environments.

In summary, Mosca and Mosquitto differ in their underlying architecture, ease of use, scalability, configuration options, community/support, and integration capabilities. These differences should be considered based on specific project requirements in order to select the appropriate messaging broker for IoT development.

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

Detailed Comparison

Mosquitto
Mosquitto
Mosca
Mosca

It is lightweight and is suitable for use on all devices from low power single board computers to full servers.. The MQTT protocol provides a lightweight method of carrying out messaging using a publish/subscribe model. This makes it suitable for Internet of Things messaging such as with low power sensors or mobile devices such as phones, embedded computers or microcontrollers.

A Node.js MQTT broker, which can be used as a Standalone Service or embedded in another Node.js application.

-
MQTT 3.1 and 3.1.1 compliant; QoS 0 and QoS 1; Various storage options for QoS 1 offline packets, and subscriptions; Usable inside ANY other Node.js app;
Statistics
Stacks
136
Stacks
16
Followers
306
Followers
43
Votes
14
Votes
0
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 10
    Simple and light
  • 4
    Performance
No community feedback yet
Integrations
No integrations available
Node.js
Node.js

What are some alternatives to Mosquitto, Mosca?

Kafka

Kafka

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

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.

Gearman

Gearman

Gearman allows you to do work in parallel, to load balance processing, and to call functions between languages. It can be used in a variety of applications, from high-availability web sites to the transport of database replication events.

Memphis

Memphis

Highly scalable and effortless data streaming platform. Made to enable developers and data teams to collaborate and build real-time and streaming apps fast.

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