Apache Airflow vs. RabbitMQ

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Apache Airflow
Score 8.7 out of 10
N/A
Apache Airflow is an open source tool that can be used to programmatically author, schedule and monitor data pipelines using Python and SQL.N/A
RabbitMQ
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
RabbitMQ, an open source message broker, is part of Pivotal Software, a VMware company acquired in 2019, and supports message queue, multiple messaging protocols, and more. RabbitMQ is available open source, however VMware also offers a range of commercial services for RabbitMQ; these are available as part of the Pivotal App Suite.N/A
Pricing
Apache AirflowRabbitMQ
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Apache AirflowRabbitMQ
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
YesNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache AirflowRabbitMQ
Features
Apache AirflowRabbitMQ
Workload Automation
Comparison of Workload Automation features of Product A and Product B
Apache Airflow
8.7
12 Ratings
5% above category average
RabbitMQ
-
Ratings
Multi-platform scheduling9.312 Ratings00 Ratings
Central monitoring8.912 Ratings00 Ratings
Logging8.612 Ratings00 Ratings
Alerts and notifications9.312 Ratings00 Ratings
Analysis and visualization6.812 Ratings00 Ratings
Application integration9.412 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Apache AirflowRabbitMQ
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

No answers on this topic

Medium-sized Companies
ActiveBatch Workload Automation
ActiveBatch Workload Automation
Score 7.5 out of 10
Apache Kafka
Apache Kafka
Score 8.6 out of 10
Enterprises
Redwood RunMyJobs
Redwood RunMyJobs
Score 9.6 out of 10
Apache Kafka
Apache Kafka
Score 8.6 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache AirflowRabbitMQ
Likelihood to Recommend
8.8
(12 ratings)
9.9
(11 ratings)
Usability
8.2
(3 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
6.5
(4 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache AirflowRabbitMQ
Likelihood to Recommend
Apache
Airflow is well-suited for data engineering pipelines, creating scheduled workflows, and working with various data sources. You can implement almost any kind of DAG for any use case using the different operators or enforce your operator using the Python operator with ease. The MLOps feature of Airflow can be enhanced to match MLFlow-like features, making Airflow the go-to solution for all workloads, from data science to data engineering.
Read full review
Open Source
It is highly recommended that if you have microservices architecture and if you want to solve 2 phase commit issue, you should use RabbitMQ for communication between microservices. It is a quick and reliable mode of communication between microservices. It is also helpful if you want to implement a job and worker mechanism. You can push the jobs into RabbitMQ and that will be sent to the consumer. It is highly reliable so you won't miss any jobs and you can also implement a retry of jobs with the dead letter queue feature. It will be also helpful in time-consuming API. You can put time-consuming items into a queue so they will be processed later and your API will be quick.
Read full review
Pros
Apache
  • Apache Airflow is one of the best Orchestration platforms and a go-to scheduler for teams building a data platform or pipelines.
  • Apache Airflow supports multiple operators, such as the Databricks, Spark, and Python operators. All of these provide us with functionality to implement any business logic.
  • Apache Airflow is highly scalable, and we can run a large number of DAGs with ease. It provided HA and replication for workers. Maintaining airflow deployments is very easy, even for smaller teams, and we also get lots of metrics for observability.
Read full review
Open Source
  • What RabbitMQ does well is what it's advertised to do. It is good at providing lots of high volume, high availability queue. We've seen it handle upwards of 10 million messages in its queues, spread out over 200 queues before its publish/consume rates dipped. So yeah, it can definitely handle a lot of messages and a lot of queues. Depending on the size of the machine RabbitMQ is running on, I'm sure it can handle more.
  • Decent number of plugins! Want a plugin that gives you an interface to view all the queues and see their publish/consume rates? Yes, there's one for that. Want a plugin to "shovel" messages from one queue to another in an emergency? Check. Want a plugin that does extra logging for all the messages received? Got you covered!
  • Lots of configuration possibilities. We've tuned over 100 settings over the past year to get the performance and reliability just right. This could be a downside though--it's pretty confusing and some settings were hard to understand.
Read full review
Cons
Apache
  • UI/Dashboard can be updated to be customisable, and jobs summary in groups of errors/failures/success, instead of each job, so that a summary of errors can be used as a starting point for reviewing them.
  • Navigation - It's a bit dated. Could do with more modern web navigation UX. i.e. sidebars navigation instead of browser back/forward.
  • Again core functional reorg in terms of UX. Navigation can be improved for core functions as well, instead of discovery.
Read full review
Open Source
  • It breaks communication if we don't acknowledge early. In some cases our work items are time consuming that will take a time and in that scenario we are getting errors that RabbitMQ broke the channel. It will be good if RabbitMQ provides two acknowledgements, one is for that it has been received at client side and second ack is client is completed the processing part.
Read full review
Usability
Apache
For its capability to connect with multicloud environments. Access Control management is something that we don't get in all the schedulers and orchestrators. But although it provides so many flexibility and options to due to python , some level of knowledge of python is needed to be able to build workflows.
Read full review
Open Source
RabbitMQ is very easy to configure for all supported languages (Python, Java, etc.). I have personally used it on Raspberry Pi devices via a Flask Python API as well as in Java applications. I was able to learn it quickly and now have full mastery of it. I highly recommend it for any IoT project.
Read full review
Support Rating
Apache
No answers on this topic
Open Source
I gave it a 10 but we do not have a support contract with any company for RabbitMQ so there is no official support in that regard. However, there is a community and questions asked on StackOverflow or any other major question and answer site will usually get a response.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Apache
Multiple DAGs can be orchestrated simultaneously at varying times, and runs can be reproduced or replicated with relative ease. Overall, utilizing Apache Airflow is easier to use than other solutions now on the market. It is simple to integrate in Apache Airflow, and the workflow can be monitored and scheduling can be done quickly using Apache Airflow. We advocate using this tool for automating the data pipeline or process.
Read full review
Open Source
RabbitMQ has a few advantages over Azure Service Bus 1) RMQ handles substantially larger files - ASB tops out at 100MB, we use RabbitMQfor files over 200MB 2) RabbitMQ can be easily setup on prem - Azure Service Bus is cloud only 3) RabbitMQ exchanges are easier to configure over ASB subscriptions ASB has a few advantages too 1) Cloud based - just a few mouse clicks and you're up and running
Read full review
Return on Investment
Apache
  • Impact Depends on number of workflows. If there are lot of workflows then it has a better usecase as the implementation is justified as it needs resources , dedicated VMs, Database that has a cost
  • Donot use it if you have very less usecases
Read full review
Open Source
  • Positive: we don't need to keep way too many backend machines around to deal with bursts because RabbitMQ can absorb and buffer bursts long enough to let an understaffed set of backend services to catch up on processing. Hard to put a number to it but we probably save $5k a month having fewer machines around.
  • Negative: we've got many angry customers due to queues suddenly disappearing and dropping our messages when we try to publish to them afterward. Ideally, RabbitMQ should warn the user when queues expire due to inactivity but it doesn't, and due to our own bugs we've lost a lot of customer data as a result.
  • Positive: makes decoupling the web and API services from the deeper backend services easier by providing queues as an interface. This allowed us to split up our teams and have them develop independently of each other, speeding up software development.
Read full review
ScreenShots