[gnfargbl]

Pulsar. Works extremely well as both a job queue and a data bus.

We have been using it in this application for half a decade now with no serious issues. I don't understand why it doesn't get more popular attention.

[VenturingVole]

Pulsar vs Kafka was a significant lesson to me: The "best" technology isn't always the winner.

I put it in quotes because I'm a massive fan of Pulsar and addressing the shortcomings of Kafka. However, with regards to some choices at a former workplace: The broader existing support/integration ecosystem along with Confluent's commercial capabilities won out with regards to technology choices and I was forced to acquiesce.

A bit like Betamax vs VHS, albeit that one pre-dates me significantly.

[enether]

and it then becomes a self-perpetuating cycle because the network effect and usage of one product makes it become exponentially more robust & mature than the other. I've heard that Pulsar is buggy basically, and I wouldn't be surprised because it doesn't have thousands of organizations using it in all sorts of ways. It's not its fault too much really

[akshayshah]

Even StreamNative is effectively abandoning Pulsar and going all-in on the Kafka protocol. I can see the theoretical benefits of Pulsar, but it just doesn’t seem to have the ecosystem momentum to compete with the Kafka juggernaut.

[gnfargbl]

The advantages of Pulsar are very much practical, at least for us. Without it we would have to manage two separate messaging systems.

I don't see any evidence of StreamNative abandoning Pulsar at this point. I do see a compatibility layer for the Kafka protocol. That's fine.

[akshayshah]

It sure looks like they’re going quite a ways beyond Kafka-on-Pulsar - the Ursa/Oxia work they’re focused on right now replaces BookKeeper and seems very firmly Kafka-oriented. Or does Ursa also work with the Pulsar protocol?

[matteomerli]

Ursa supports Pulsar protocol as well