Re: How is this different from Kafka and NATS?

["erlend-sh (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>]

GitHub user erlend-sh added a comment to the discussion: How is this different from Kafka and NATS?

From the FAQ:

> [Q: What is the difference between Iggy and traditional message brokers like Kafka?](https://iggy.apache.org/docs/#q-what-is-the-difference-between-iggy-and-traditional-message-brokers-like-kafka)
> 
> Iggy is a persistent message streaming platform that stores messages in an append-only log format, similar to Kafka. However, Iggy is designed for high performance and low latency using io_uring and a thread-per-core architecture. Iggy uses its own binary protocol rather than the Kafka protocol. Clients can use an Iggy SDK, implement the documented binary protocol, or use the HTTP API.

The welcome page of the docs also has a high level comparison.

<img width="1655" height="1186" alt="IMG_3358" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/873b4dfc-8469-4aab-bbca-28776a4c60dc" />

Still, a deeper dive on the differences would be very nice. When I asked AI about a Rust alternative to NATS, Iggy was the top suggestion. They still cover slightly different ground though, and that’d be good to have a canonical explanation for.

GitHub link: https://github.com/apache/iggy/discussions/2470#discussioncomment-18476242

----
This is an automatically sent email for dev@iggy.apache.org.
To unsubscribe, please send an email to: dev-unsubscribe@iggy.apache.org