Apache Kafka vs. Apache Pulsar vs. SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS)

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Apache Kafka
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
Apache Kafka is an open-source stream processing platform developed by the Apache Software Foundation written in Scala and Java. The Kafka event streaming platform is used by thousands of companies for high-performance data pipelines, streaming analytics, data integration, and mission-critical applications.N/A
Apache Pulsar
Score 9.2 out of 10
N/A
Apache Pulsar is a cloud-native, distributed messaging and streaming platform originally created at Yahoo! and now an Apache Software Foundation project. It is free and open source, available under the Apache License, version 2.0.N/A
SSIS
Score 7.6 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft's SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS) is a data integration solution.N/A
Pricing
Apache KafkaApache PulsarSQL Server Integration Services (SSIS)
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Apache KafkaApache PulsarSSIS
Free Trial
NoNoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoYesNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache KafkaApache PulsarSQL Server Integration Services (SSIS)
Features
Apache KafkaApache PulsarSQL Server Integration Services (SSIS)
Data Source Connection
Comparison of Data Source Connection features of Product A and Product B
Apache Kafka
-
Ratings
Apache Pulsar
-
Ratings
SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS)
7.0
56 Ratings
17% below category average
Connect to traditional data sources00 Ratings00 Ratings9.056 Ratings
Connecto to Big Data and NoSQL00 Ratings00 Ratings5.043 Ratings
Data Transformations
Comparison of Data Transformations features of Product A and Product B
Apache Kafka
-
Ratings
Apache Pulsar
-
Ratings
SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS)
6.8
56 Ratings
17% below category average
Simple transformations00 Ratings00 Ratings9.056 Ratings
Complex transformations00 Ratings00 Ratings4.755 Ratings
Data Modeling
Comparison of Data Modeling features of Product A and Product B
Apache Kafka
-
Ratings
Apache Pulsar
-
Ratings
SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS)
7.5
54 Ratings
4% below category average
Data model creation00 Ratings00 Ratings9.028 Ratings
Metadata management00 Ratings00 Ratings6.035 Ratings
Business rules and workflow00 Ratings00 Ratings7.045 Ratings
Collaboration00 Ratings00 Ratings9.040 Ratings
Testing and debugging00 Ratings00 Ratings6.351 Ratings
Data Governance
Comparison of Data Governance features of Product A and Product B
Apache Kafka
-
Ratings
Apache Pulsar
-
Ratings
SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS)
5.3
43 Ratings
40% below category average
Integration with data quality tools00 Ratings00 Ratings6.038 Ratings
Integration with MDM tools00 Ratings00 Ratings4.538 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Apache KafkaApache PulsarSQL Server Integration Services (SSIS)
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

No answers on this topic

Skyvia
Skyvia
Score 10.0 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
IBM MQ
IBM MQ
Score 9.1 out of 10
Confluent
Confluent
Score 9.3 out of 10
IBM InfoSphere Information Server
IBM InfoSphere Information Server
Score 8.0 out of 10
Enterprises
IBM MQ
IBM MQ
Score 9.1 out of 10
Spotfire Streaming
Spotfire Streaming
Score 5.2 out of 10
IBM InfoSphere Information Server
IBM InfoSphere Information Server
Score 8.0 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache KafkaApache PulsarSQL Server Integration Services (SSIS)
Likelihood to Recommend
8.0
(19 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(54 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
9.0
(2 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
9.0
(4 ratings)
Usability
8.0
(2 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(9 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
8.8
(6 ratings)
Support Rating
8.4
(4 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(8 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(2 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache KafkaApache PulsarSQL Server Integration Services (SSIS)
Likelihood to Recommend
Apache
Apache Kafka is well-suited for most data-streaming use cases. Amazon Kinesis and Azure EventHubs, unless you have a specific use case where using those cloud PaAS for your data lakes, once set up well, Apache Kafka will take care of everything else in the background. Azure EventHubs, is good for cross-cloud use cases, and Amazon Kinesis - I have no real-world experience. But I believe it is the same.
Read full review
Apache
No answers on this topic
Microsoft
As I mentioned earlier SQL Server Integration Services is suitable if you want to manage data from different applications. It really helps in fetching the data and generating reports. Its automation make it very easy and time efficient. It works well with large database as well. But it doesn't work well with real time data, it will take some time to gather the real time data. I would not recommend using it in a real time/fast-paced environment.
Read full review
Pros
Apache
  • Really easy to configure. I've used other message brokers such as RabbitMQ and compared to them, Kafka's configurations are very easy to understand and tweak.
  • Very scalable: easily configured to run on multiple nodes allowing for ease of parallelism (assuming your queues/topics don't have to be consumed in the exact same order the messages were delivered)
  • Not exactly a feature, but I trust Kafka will be around for at least another decade because active development has continued to be strong and there's a lot of financial backing from Confluent and LinkedIn, and probably many other companies who are using it (which, anecdotally, is many).
Read full review
Apache
No answers on this topic
Microsoft
  • Standard ETL use cases for daily loads
  • Loading incoming data from Vendors which is placed on FTP and adding them to the SQL Warehouse
  • Creating outgoing data files and writing them to Vendor FTPs
  • Easy Active Directory integration for seamless connections to SQL Server
  • CI/CD by hosting the code on visualstudio.com
Read full review
Cons
Apache
  • Sometimes it becomes difficult to monitor our Kafka deployments. We've been able to overcome it largely using AWS MSK, a managed service for Apache Kafka, but a separate monitoring dashboard would have been great.
  • Simplify the process for local deployment of Kafka and provide a user interface to get visibility into the different topics and the messages being processed.
  • Learning curve around creation of broker and topics could be simplified
Read full review
Apache
No answers on this topic
Microsoft
  • Connection managers for online data sources can be tricky to configure.
  • Performance tuning is an art form and trialing different data flow task options can be cumbersome. SSIS can do a better job of providing performance data including historical for monitoring.
  • Mapping destination using OLE DB command is difficult as destination columns are unnamed.
  • Excel or flat file connections are limited by version and type.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Apache
Kafka is quickly becoming core product of the organization, indeed it is replacing older messaging systems. No better alternatives found yet
Read full review
Apache
No answers on this topic
Microsoft
Some features should be revised or improved, some tools (using it with Visual Studio) of the toolbox should be less schematic and somewhat more flexible. Using for example, the CSV data import is still very old-fashioned and if the data format changes it requires a bit of manual labor to accept the new data structure
Read full review
Usability
Apache
Apache Kafka is highly recommended to develop loosely coupled, real-time processing applications. Also, Apache Kafka provides property based configuration. Producer, Consumer and broker contain their own separate property file
Read full review
Apache
No answers on this topic
Microsoft
SSIS is a great tool for most ETL needs. It has the 90% (or more) use cases covered and even in many of the use cases where it is not ideal SSIS can be extended via a .NET language to do the job well in a supportable way for almost any performance workload.
Read full review
Performance
Apache
No answers on this topic
Apache
No answers on this topic
Microsoft
SQL Server Integration Services performance is dependent directly upon the resources provided to the system. In our environment, we allocated 6 nodes of 4 CPUs, 64GB each, running in parallel. Unfortunately, we had to ramp-up to such a robust environment to get the performance to where we needed it. Most of the reports are completed in a reasonable timeframe. However, in the case of slow running reports, it is often difficult if not impossible to cancel the report without killing the report instance or stopping the service.
Read full review
Support Rating
Apache
Support for Apache Kafka (if willing to pay) is available from Confluent that includes the same time that created Kafka at Linkedin so they know this software in and out. Moreover, Apache Kafka is well known and best practices documents and deployment scenarios are easily available for download. For example, from eBay, Linkedin, Uber, and NYTimes.
Read full review
Apache
No answers on this topic
Microsoft
The support, when necessary, is excellent. But beyond that, it is very rarely necessary because the user community is so large, vibrant and knowledgable, a simple Google query or forum question can answer almost everything you want to know. You can also get prewritten script tasks with a variety of functionality that saves a lot of time.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
Apache
No answers on this topic
Apache
No answers on this topic
Microsoft
The implementation may be different in each case, it is important to properly analyze all the existing infrastructure to understand the kind of work needed, the type of software used and the compatibility between these, the features that you want to exploit, to understand what is possible and which ones require integration with third-party tools
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Apache
I used other messaging/queue solutions that are a lot more basic than Confluent Kafka, as well as another solution that is no longer in the market called Xively, which was bought and "buried" by Google. In comparison, these solutions offer way fewer functionalities and respond to other needs.
Read full review
Apache
No answers on this topic
Microsoft
I think SQL Server Integration Services is better suited for on-premises data movement and ADF is more suited for the cloud. Though ADF has more connectors, SQL Server Integration Services is more robust and has better functionality just because it has been around much longer
Read full review
Return on Investment
Apache
  • Positive: Get a quick and reliable pub/sub model implemented - data across components flows easily.
  • Positive: it's scalable so we can develop small and scale for real-world scenarios
  • Negative: it's easy to get into a confusing situation if you are not experienced yet or something strange has happened (rare, but it does). Troubleshooting such situations can take time and effort.
Read full review
Apache
No answers on this topic
Microsoft
  • Without this, we would have to manually update a spreadsheet of our SQL Server inventory
  • We would also have poor alerting; if an instance was down we wouldn't know until it was reported by a user
  • We only have one other person who uses SQL Server Integration Services , he's the expert. It would fall to me without him and I would not enjoy being responsible for it.
Read full review
ScreenShots