Apache Camel vs. Google Cloud Pub/Sub

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Apache Camel
Score 6.3 out of 10
N/A
Apache Camel is an open source integration platform.N/A
Google Cloud Pub/Sub
Score 9.2 out of 10
N/A
Google offers Cloud Pub/Sub, a managed message oriented middleware supporting many-to-many asynchronous messaging between applications.N/A
Pricing
Apache CamelGoogle Cloud Pub/Sub
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Apache CamelGoogle Cloud Pub/Sub
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details——
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache CamelGoogle Cloud Pub/Sub
Top Pros
Top Cons
Best Alternatives
Apache CamelGoogle Cloud Pub/Sub
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

Amazon SNS
Amazon SNS
Score 8.3 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Boomi
Boomi
Score 8.3 out of 10
Apache Kafka
Apache Kafka
Score 8.1 out of 10
Enterprises
TIBCO B2B Integration Solution
TIBCO B2B Integration Solution
Score 8.0 out of 10
Apache Kafka
Apache Kafka
Score 8.1 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache CamelGoogle Cloud Pub/Sub
Likelihood to Recommend
7.9
(11 ratings)
9.8
(7 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(2 ratings)
Availability
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
9.8
(3 ratings)
Configurability
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
Product Scalability
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache CamelGoogle Cloud Pub/Sub
Likelihood to Recommend
Apache
Message brokering across different systems, with transactionality and the ability to have fine tuned control over what happens using Java (or other languages), instead of a heavy, proprietary languages. One situation that it doesn't fit very well (as far as I have experienced) is when your workflow requires significant data mapping. While possible when using Java tooling, some other visual data mapping tools in other integration frameworks are easier to work with.
Read full review
Google
If you want to stream high volumes of data, be it for ETL streaming or event sourcing, Google Cloud Pub/Sub is your go-to tool. It's easy to learn, easy to observe its metrics and scales with ease without additional configuration so if you have more producers of consumers, all you need to do is to deploy on k8s your solutions so that you can perform autoscaling on your pods to adjust to the data volume. The DLQ is also very transparent and easy to configure. Your code will have no logic whatsoever regarding orchestrating pubsub, you just plug and play. However, if you are not in the Google Cloud Pub/Sub environment, you might have trouble or be most likely unable to use it since I think it's a product of Google Cloud.
Read full review
Pros
Apache
  • Camel has an easy learning curve. It is fairly well documented and there are about 5-6 books on Camel.
  • There is a large user group and blogs devoted to all things Camel and the developers of Camel provide quick answers and have also been very quick to patch Camel, when bugs are reported.
  • Camel integrates well with well known frameworks like Spring, and other middleware products like Apache Karaf and Servicemix.
  • There are over 150 components for the Camel framework that help integrate with diverse software platforms.
  • Camel is also good for creating microservices.
Read full review
Google
  • With a pub/sub architecture the consumer is decoupled in time from the publisher i.e. if the consumer goes down, it can replay any events that occurred during its downtime.
  • It also allows consumer to throttle and batch incoming data providing much needed flexibility while working with multiple types of data sources
  • A simple and easy to use UI on cloud console for setup and debugging
  • It enables event-driven architectures and asynchronous parallel processing, while improving performance, reliability and scalability
Read full review
Cons
Apache
  • didn't work well when our developers tried to transform heavy data sets
  • Apache Camel's whole logic is based on java so team needs to have a great skill set in java
  • if there are a handful of workflows then Apache Camel's full potential can't be realized
Read full review
Google
  • Would be nice if the queue could be extended beyond 7 days.
  • We found it a bit tricky replay unacknowledged messages when needed.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Apache
No answers on this topic
Google
It serves all of our purposes in the most transparent way I can imagine, after seeing other message queueing providers, I can only attest to its quality.
Read full review
Usability
Apache
No answers on this topic
Google
It has many libraries in many languages, google provides either good guides or they're AI generated code libraries that are easy to understand. It has very good observability too.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
Apache
No answers on this topic
Google
I have never faced a single problem in 4 years.
Read full review
Performance
Apache
No answers on this topic
Google
It's very fast, can be even better if you use protobuf.
Read full review
Support Rating
Apache
No answers on this topic
Google
They have decent documentation, but you need to pay for support. We weren't able to answer all our questions with the documentation and didn't have time to setup support before we needed it so I can't give it a higher rating but I think it tends to be a bit slow unless you're a GCP enterprise support customer.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Apache
If you are looking for a Java-based open source low cost equivalent to webMethods or Azure Logic Apps, Apache Camel is an excellent choice as it is mature and widely deployed, and included in many vendored Java application servers too such as Redhat JBoss EAP. Apache Camel is lacking on the GUI tooling side compared to commercial products such as webMethods or Azure Logic Apps.
Read full review
Google
Having used Amazon Web Services SNS & SQS I can say that even if the latter may offer more features, Google Cloud Pub/Sub is easier to use. On the other hand, usage of SNS & SQS as well as documentation and troubleshooting is easier with the AWS solution. Since we are not using GCP only for Pub/Sub the choice depends on other variables.
Read full review
Scalability
Apache
No answers on this topic
Google
You can just plug in consumers at will and it will respond, there's no need for further configuration or introducing new concepts. You have a queue, if it's slow, you plug in more consumers to process more messages: simple as that.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Apache
  • Very fast time to market in that so many components are available to use immediately.
  • Error handling mechanisms and patterns of practice are robust and easy to use which in turn has made our application more robust from the start, so fewer bugs.
  • However, testing and debugging routes is more challenging than working is standard Java so that takes more time (less time than writing the components from scratch).
  • Most people don't know Camel coming in and many junior developers find it overwhelming and are not enthusiastic to learn it. So finding people that want to develop/maintain it is a challenge.
Read full review
Google
  • Increased Efficiency with reliable and Google managed services up all the time wit Disaster Recovery in place as well
  • Definitely Lower costs being a cloud based solution and easier to setup
  • Faster Project delivery and go to market plan for the business use cases basis this technology at the back end
Read full review
ScreenShots