Apache Kafka vs. SharePlex

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
SharePlex
Score 10.0 out of 10
N/A
SharePlex from Quest Software is a data replication software offering near real-time replication and supporting a wide variety of databases.N/A
Pricing
Apache KafkaSharePlex
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Apache KafkaSharePlex
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 KafkaSharePlex
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 …
SharePlex
Chose SharePlex
SharePlex support is an award-winning team, which is available for 24 hours, and any time they have solutions with perfect expertise. Besides, SharePlex has supported data migration, with multiple reporting features that ensure there are comprehensive database evaluations. The …
Chose SharePlex
SharePlex was a clear winner in comparison to its competitors. It beats GoldenGate on price, providing equivalent features and performance at a fraction of the price and without the need to license costly Oracle features at the database level. DB Visit was a strong contender …
Chose SharePlex
At the time we did our proof of concept (2011), Shareplex was up and running within a couple of hours. The Goldengate techs were unable to get their product to work. Pricing for Shareplex was half of what Oracle quoted. Goldengate did not include monitoring or compare/repair …
Chose SharePlex
SharePlex is more robust than GoldenGate when it comes to replicating the particular transactions in our environment. GoldenGate has the advantage of supporting hetrogeneous databases, but it does not apply to us since we use a single database platform in this setting. In …
Best Alternatives
Apache KafkaSharePlex
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

Hornetsecurity VM Backup
Hornetsecurity VM Backup
Score 8.2 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
IBM MQ
IBM MQ
Score 8.8 out of 10
Cohesity Data Cloud
Cohesity Data Cloud
Score 8.8 out of 10
Enterprises
IBM MQ
IBM MQ
Score 8.8 out of 10
Cohesity Data Cloud
Cohesity Data Cloud
Score 8.8 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache KafkaSharePlex
Likelihood to Recommend
8.0
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
9.0
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
Usability
8.0
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.4
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache KafkaSharePlex
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
SharePlex is best suited for replicating relatively small but steady streams of data, instead of huge amounts of data surge. Keep in mind that it relies on database logs (redo logs in Oracle) to replicate data in the form of "messages", and therefore it is mandatory to put the database in forced logging mode - that may be a prohibiting factor in some situations.
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
  • Replicate data for Dev/QA
  • Easy setup/upgrade
  • Support is easily reachable
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
  • Documentation: There are some areas where the documentation is weak or dated. In particular, running SharePlex on RAC is a more involved process than the implementation guides would have you believe. When reaching out for assistance, the answer from Dell (a few years ago) was to engage their consulting team.
  • Built in scripts/agents: SharePlex comes with a handful of monitoring and management scripts that can be run as cron jobs. Unfortunately, these scripts are primitive and rigid, requiring the user to hard-code values into the script body and limiting their usefulness when you're running multiple replication streams. Some of the methods and dependencies are heavy. We ended up writing custom scripts that do what we need but it would be helpful if there were greater functionality and flexibility out of the box.
  • Compared to other tools, there is not as wide (or at least as active) a user presence. If you're having difficulties you may have to engage a consultant since it's less likely that you'll find an answer in a forum or blog post.
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
We depend on it to supply data to our various OLTP and Data Warehouse environments
Read full review
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 is very usable once you get over the initial setup.
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
Support is very responsive. They take ownership of the problems and see them through to the finish. When a bug is found they work towards developing testing and making the fix available to us to solve the problem.
Read full review
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
SharePlex was a clear winner in comparison to its competitors. It beats GoldenGate on price, providing equivalent features and performance at a fraction of the price and without the need to license costly Oracle features at the database level. DB Visit was a strong contender for us as well and it is an excellent product I would also recommend, but it did not have quite enough of a user and community presence and penetration for our management to feel comfortable with.
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
  • Data migration allows the company to make solid business changes, more so on new business plans.
  • Further, system flexibility supports multiple business plans, hence, efficient and reliable.
  • Finally, real-time decisions are arrived at using SharePlex, a procedure that ensures there is transparency in the entire operations.
Read full review
ScreenShots