Apache Kafka vs. Apache Solr

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Apache Kafka
Score 8.8 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 Solr
Score 7.3 out of 10
N/A
Apache Solr is an open-source enterprise search server.N/A
Pricing
Apache KafkaApache Solr
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Apache KafkaApache Solr
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 KafkaApache Solr
Considered Both Products
Apache Kafka
Chose Apache Kafka
Apache Kafka is built for scale. From high throughput and real-time data streaming, it has a strong advantage over RabbitMQ with its low latency. This put Apache Kafka at the forefront as the platform of choice for large datasets messaging and ensuring scalability when data …
Chose Apache Kafka
It had the clustering functionality and gave tolerance against machine failure.
Chose Apache Kafka
- The biggest advantage of using Apache Kafka is that it is cloud agnostic - It handles super high volume, is fault tolerance, high performance
Chose Apache Kafka
Apache Kafka can work at a higher scale as compared to SQS. It can work with higher size per message and millions of messages per second. Moreover it can be scaled horizontally by adding more brokers to the cluster. SQS is good enough for simple use cases like making a task …
Chose Apache Kafka
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 …
Chose Apache Kafka
Apache Kafka is open-sourced, scales great has cloud agnostics and performs better than Amazon Kinesis [in my view]. Amazon Kinesis has some limitations and vendor lockin is not something I [like]. With Confluent operators you can easily install it on a kubernetes cluster.
Chose Apache Kafka
We really needed to get away from using a SQL database to act as a queue for processing records, so a new solution was needed. Kafka is a leading software application initially designed for queuing messages which is essentially what we were looking for. It has a great user …
Chose Apache Kafka
Kafka is simple and lower in price.
Chose Apache Kafka
For us, Kafka really doesn't have a 1:1 alternative. We have used ActiveMQ extensively and we still use it as a lighter option for small messages. The situation is similar with Redis - although it could be used like a Kafka alternative, we do use it just as a per-component …
Chose Apache Kafka
Apache Kafka is much more scalable and more reliable. Does not depend on memory, works well on rotational disks and that makes it a cheaper to use solution on low hardware requirements. Running multiple consumers on the same topic can also mean processing the same data again …
Chose Apache Kafka
All stack tech helps our app and system. These technologies allow us to have the data available faster between different regions (due to our particular configuration) and thus the data and processing load of each system is lower. This allows the systems to be used more …
Chose Apache Kafka
We had lots of problems with active mq. That is why we started using Apache Kafka.
Chose Apache Kafka
Kafka is not a real messaging broker implementation as RabbitMQ or TIBCO EMS/JMS are. Although it can be used as messaging, we like the idea behind the Kafka (data isn't "passing by," instead it remains centra, so the client can revisit the data if necessary). This also …
Chose Apache Kafka
Confluent Cloud is still based on Apache Kafka but it has a subscription fee so, from a long term perspective, it is wiser to deploy your own Kafka instance that spans public and private cloud. Amazon Kinesis, Google Cloud Pub/Sub do not do well for a very number of messages …
Chose Apache Kafka
I would only use RabbitMQ over Kafka when you need to have delay queues or tons of small topics/queues around.
I don't know too much about Pulsar - currently evaluating it - but it's supposed to have the same or better throughput while allowing for tons of queues. Stay tuned - I …
Chose Apache Kafka
Kafka is faster and more scalable, also "free" as opensource (albeit we deploy using a commercial distribution). Infrastructure tends to be cheaper. On the other hand, projects must adapt to Kafka APIs that sometimes change and BAU increases until a major 1.x version comes out …
Apache Solr
Chose Apache Solr
We tryed to promote Redis as cache solution for application, in order to replace Apache Solr, but it won't go well. Redis best pratices requires some more computer resources. With Elastic Search, the use case was another, and don't compete with Apache Solr.
Chose Apache Solr
Apache Solr is a ready-to-use product addressing specific use cases such as keyword searches from a huge set of data documents.
Chose Apache Solr
We have considering AWS search and Elastic search but decide to go with Solr as we need high speed and flexible query, and so far it meets all our requirement so we still continue with Solr.
Chose Apache Solr
We tried to use both Elasticsearch and Swiftype with Drupal 8 but there are currently no good modules that integrate Drupal with those solutions. So Solr was really the only option for a Drupal 8 web site. It's not as easy to learn or use as Swiftype, but in the end I think it …
Chose Apache Solr
Before using Solr, we used a self-made search engine. Solr has helped us increase our capacity to serve our customers the results they are looking for easily without breaking down. Our previous platform was not dynamic enough to accommodate our growing traffic or smart enough …
Chose Apache Solr
Azure Search is not as mature as Apache Solr at this point. So the range of query flexibility is less than Solr. Also, when indexing content goes beyond 1 TB, it might become costly for Azure Search.
Chose Apache Solr
Between Solr and ElasticSearch, there is a constant struggle to pick the best one. ElasticSearch is part of ELK and ties in well with LogStash and Kibana which makes it great for logs and big data stuff. Add some logs and see which works best for your particular access methods …
Chose Apache Solr
We switched from search indexes stored in mysql to soar and it's made a world of difference for our growing businesses. The relational databases are very poor for handling the complex data searches require and Solr delivered all the tools we need to get the performance our end …
Chose Apache Solr
Apache Solr in general stacks up very well to its competitors, it provides much of the same features and performance and has the benefits of being an open-source project with an active contributor base that works consistently and improves the platform. Depending on your setup …
Chose Apache Solr
Some people on my team tried MondoDB and had several problems (don't remember which ones).

Elasticsearch would be a good choice but we didn't have it in our minds when we made the choice.
Best Alternatives
Apache KafkaApache Solr
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

Yext
Yext
Score 7.3 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
IBM MQ
IBM MQ
Score 8.8 out of 10
Guru
Guru
Score 9.0 out of 10
Enterprises
IBM MQ
IBM MQ
Score 8.8 out of 10
Guru
Guru
Score 9.0 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache KafkaApache Solr
Likelihood to Recommend
8.0
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
9.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
8.0
(0 ratings)
7.0
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.4
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache KafkaApache Solr
Likelihood to Recommend
For brokering messages, Confluent Kafka is well suited since it offers a managed solution ready to use. Scenarios where the solution is not very well suited are for example, where pricing is an issue. The solution costs quite a lot for basic usage (for example: for 3 clusters, pricing is above 100k$ a year).
Read full review
Very effective for end-user searching applications and for generating search results. Also very well suited to those looking for high reliability and performance. If [you're doing] fuzzy searching or if you are working on a smaller end-user application or an internal application that does not require high performance and flexible/adapting searching then it may not be necessary to use Solr.
Read full review
Pros
  • Apache Kafka is able to handle a large number of I/Os (writes) using 3-4 cheap servers.
  • It scales very well over large workloads and can handle extreme-scale deployments (eg. Linkedin with 300 billion user events each day).
  • The same Kafka setup can be used as a messaging bus, storage system or a log aggregator making it easy to maintain as one system feeding multiple applications.
Read full review
  • Faceted navigation and field collapsing/grouping : filtering and quick results were what we needed for our websites. Our customers needed to have this functionalities for good and efficient results.
  • We tested them with our customers' registered searches (they received all new goods matching with their registered searches by emails and/or mobile push). Results were incredible by comparison with our old system (old MySQL requests).
  • Note : we didn't put all our data in Solr. Just what we need for searching uses. Other data stayed in our MySQL database.
  • Auto-suggest : our old auto-suggest wasn't performing well. With Apache Solr, our new one was worked really well ! The suggestions came quickly and suggestions were good.
  • We also extended auto-suggestion with geo-spatial data and it worked well.
  • Hit highlighting : we used this functionality and we didn't have problem and nasty surprise.
  • Keep all data status during data upgrading (see next details for improvements)
Read full review
Cons
  • The Kafka Tool is a community-made Java application that looks and feels from the past century.
  • Logging can be confusing. This certainly shows when we have to do troubleshooting.
  • Hybrid scenarios - pub/sub, but there are services in and outside a Kubernetes cluster. Then there are a ~3 options, but only 2 (the harder ones) are production-safe.
Read full review
  • Ease of use -- this is not always the easier platform to configure.
  • Developer Community -- There are not a whole lot of folks out there that understand this stuff so finding talent is difficult.
  • Drupal 8 -- We've been frustrated with slow development on APIs for Drupal 8 integration.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Kafka has suited our use case very well so far. Going forward we are planning to expand our platform manifold so the load on Kafka and our reliance on Kafka is going to increase only.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Usability
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
It takes some time to deploy and currectly maintein it. And also, to learn how to use and integrate in the enviroment as well. Once you get theses steps done, it usability is very simple, and almost of the time it don't require no further attention on it. Even for maintence, if you deploy it on a cluster mode, it is very reliable and easy to take one host down.
Read full review
Support Rating
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
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
Apache Kafka is built for scale. From high throughput and real-time data streaming, it has a strong advantage over RabbitMQ with its low latency. This put Apache Kafka at the forefront as the platform of choice for large datasets messaging and ensuring scalability when data scale up tremendously. RabbitMQ however has its strengths in traditional messaging. Routing and message delivery reliability are the bedrock of RabbitMQ and this is where RabbitMQ excels. In my previous workplace, RabbitMQ was of choice as reliability matters more than scale. In two words. Apache Kafka for scale, RabbitMQ for reliability. And for cloud deployment and large dataset messaging in what I am doing now, Apache Kafka is the default choice.
Read full review
We switched from search indexes stored in MySQL to soar and it's made a world of difference for our growing businesses. The relational databases are very poor for handling the complex data searches require and Solr delivered all the tools we need to get the performance our end users are demanding.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • Positive: bursts of traffic on special holidays are easy to handle because Kafka can absorb and buffer all the messages we need to process long enough to let an understaffed set of back-end services catch up on processing. Hard to put a number to it but we probably save $5k a month having fewer machines running.
  • Positive: makes decoupling the web and API services from the deeper back-end services easier by providing topics as an interface. This allowed us to split up our teams and have them develop independently of each other, speeding up software development.
  • Negative: our engineers have made mistakes such as accidentally dropping a few thousand messages due to the CLI being confusing to use, and as a result a customer lost some of their precious data. I'd say that was more our fault than Kafka's though.
Read full review
  • It's enabled us to deliver fast, relevant search results on our new website. The site is still in beta and being actively developed so our complete ROI is still unknown.
  • It integrates very well with Drupal so it has saved us from having to develop a custom solution.
Read full review
ScreenShots