The performance comparison between CKafka and open-source Apache Kafka is as follows:
|Disadvantages||Occasional message loss in extreme circumstances|
|General performance||Million-level QPS||Million-level QPS|
|220,000 read/write QPS||200,000 read/write QPS|
|Cost||Very flexible billing based on your estimated peak traffic and disk capacity||High costs with labor and OPS environment required|
|OPS||Complete monitoring and alarming system, OPS ticket system, and CKafka R&D experts who answer questions at any time to quickly solve your problems||Cumbersome OPS and deployment where it is difficult to locate problems|
|Scalability||Very flexible and easy to scale. Only the VIP address needs to be specified for message sending, and broker changes are imperceptible for both message sending and receiving||Not flexible enough. The broker address needs to be specified to send messages, and ZooKeeper coordination scheduling is required for message receiving|
|Availability||Very high availability. Automatic leader/follower switch is supported. CKafka guarantees an availability of 99.95%||High availability. Automatic leader/follower switch is supported. Messages may be lost after switch due to async flush and replication|
|Security protection||Supported||Not supported|
|Monitoring and alarming||Supported||Not supported|
|Service support||Supported||Not supported|
- "2-core 4 GB stress test" indicates the result of a stress test on a server with 2 CPU cores and 4 GB memory.
- CKafka is compatible with the producer and consumer APIs of Apache Kafka 0.9 and above. To connect to a self-built Kafka instance on a legacy version (such as 0.8), API modification is needed. For more information, please see Connecting to Legacy Self-Built Kafka.