Redis vs Apache Kafka: How to Choose in 2024

If you're building a real-time analytics dashboard or setting up a high-throughput data pipeline, you've probably come across two heavyweight contenders: Redis and Kafka. While both technologies are often cited in discussions about real-time data processing and message brokering, they each bring a unique set of features to the table.

In this comprehensive guide, we'll delve into the technical aspects, architecture, and use cases of both Redis and Kafka to equip you with the knowledge you need to make an informed decision for your next project.

Comparison overview

To kick things off, here's a quick summary table that highlights the key differences between Redis and Kafka, providing an initial point of reference for your choice.

What is Redis?

Redis, which stands for "Remote Dictionary Server", is an open-source, in-memory data store. It's often categorized as a NoSQL database and is renowned for its high-speed performance. Redis supports various data types, including strings, hashes, lists, sets, sorted sets, JSON, bitmaps, and many others. But what truly sets it apart is its support for more complex data structures like streams. You can also integrate Redis with relational databases like MySQL or PostgreSQL. In such a setup, it serves as a fast cache for data that's time-consuming to retrieve from the primary database.

At its core, Redis operates on a single-threaded event-loop architecture. This design allows it to handle multiple operations concurrently without the overhead and complexity of multi-threading. Redis also uses what's known as "non-blocking I/O" to read and write data, which means it can perform multiple operations simultaneously without waiting for any single one to complete. This architecture makes Redis incredibly fast, efficient, and particularly well-suited for high-throughput, low-latency scenarios.

Common use cases of Redis

Some areas where Redis excels and is commonly employed include scenarios that demand rapid data access and manipulation. Some of these are listed below.

• Caching: Redis is often the first choice for caching solutions. Its in-memory nature allows for speedy read and write operations, making it ideal for reducing latency and improving application performance.
• Real-time analytics: The speed and efficiency of Redis make it perfect for real-time analytics dashboards. It can handle large volumes of read and write operations with minimal latency, providing near real-time insights.
• Sessions: Redis is frequently used to manage user sessions in web applications. Its fast data retrieval capabilities make it ideal for storing session data that needs to be accessed frequently and quickly.

While Redis genuinely shines in speed and low-latency data access due to its in-memory architecture, this strength also presents some challenges. Specifically, data durability can be compromised if not adequately persisted on disk. Moreover, relying on RAM for data storage can significantly increase your server infrastructure costs as your dataset expands.

What is Apache Kafka?

Apache Kafka is a distributed streaming platform that was initially developed by LinkedIn and later open-sourced as part of the Apache Software Foundation. Unlike traditional messaging queues, Kafka is a full-fledged event-streaming platform that can publish, subscribe, store, and process streams of records in real-time.

Kafka's architecture is inherently distributed and consists of Producers, Brokers, and Consumers. Producers are responsible for pushing data into Kafka topics. Brokers manage the storage, distribution, and retrieval of data. Consumers pull data from these topics for processing. Kafka also has a distributed commit log, which ensures that data is stored in a fault-tolerant manner across multiple servers.

Common use cases of Kafka

• Event sourcing: Kafka is a popular choice for implementing event-sourced architectures. It can store a history of events in a way that allows for replaying, making it ideal for systems that require robust audit trails or historical data analysis.
• Data lakes: Kafka can act as a buffer to handle burst data loads, serving as a temporary storage layer before the data is moved to a more permanent storage solution.
• Stream processing: Kafka is often used in real-time analytics solutions and complex event processing systems. It can handle large volumes of data and transform it in real time.

Kafka is highly scalable, and it effortlessly handles large data volumes, making it ideal for data-intensive applications. It's also well-suited for complex, real-time analytics and data transformations. While these strengths offer versatility, they come with their own set of challenges.

Kafka's distributed architecture, while powerful, introduces a level of complexity that can make it challenging to set up and manage. This complexity often requires a deeper understanding of its inner workings, potentially increasing the time and resources needed for effective implementation.

Additionally, Kafka may exhibit higher latency for data processing compared to in-memory solutions like Redis, making it less ideal for scenarios where real-time data access is crucial.

Now, let's compare Redis and Kafka across crucial aspects such as data handling, scalability, and performance to help you make an informed decision for your specific needs.

Data storage and handling

Redis is primarily an in-memory data store, which means it stores all its data in RAM, allowing for speedy read and write operations. Clients can read from and write to the Redis server using various data types like strings, hashes, lists, sets, and more.

However, the in-memory nature of Redis raises concerns about data durability. To mitigate this, Redis provides several options for data persistence, including:

• Snapshotting: This method allows you to save the dataset to disk at specified intervals. It's a straightforward way to create backups but may result in data loss if the system crashes between snapshots.
• Append-Only Files (AOF): AOF logs every write operation received by the server, providing a much higher level of durability. Based on your durability requirements, you can configure how often the log is saved to disk.

Unlike Redis, Kafka stores data on disk and uses in-memory caching to optimize data access. Producers push data to topics that reside on Kafka brokers. These brokers are intermediaries that hold and distribute data, making them central to Kafka's architecture. Consumers then pull this data from the topics for processing.

Additionally, a standout feature of Kafka is its Distributed Commit Log, which is the core of its data storage capabilities. This log functions as a sequential record-keeping system, ensuring consistent data storage across multiple servers in the cluster. Unlike Redis, which primarily relies on in-memory storage, Kafka's disk-based storage approach is well-suited for long-term data retention scenarios.

Data ingestion and processing

Data ingestion, which involves importing or loading data into a system for immediate use or subsequent processing, is a key aspect of data management. Redis and Kafka each offer unique capabilities in this domain.

Redis is widely recognized for its fast data retrieval and caching capabilities, but it's not inherently built for data ingestion or stream processing. However, Redis Streams, a feature not commonly highlighted, allows the technology to venture into the realm of data ingestion.

With Redis Streams, real-time data streams can be ingested, although this is not its primary purpose, contrary to what the name might suggest. Rather, its core function is to act as a versatile, append-only log data structure. Within this structure, each message is tagged with a unique identifier, enabling a range of applications, from message queuing to event sourcing. That said, Redis Streams does offer the flexibility to ingest real-time data streams, adding another layer of utility. Additionally, Redis Streams allows multiple consumers to read messages asynchronously, offering a degree of real-time data processing.

In contrast, Kafka is purpose-built to efficiently handle real-time data ingestion and stream processing tasks. Its architecture is specifically designed to efficiently handle these tasks. Kafka excels at ingesting large volumes of real-time data and offers built-in stream processing capabilities for real-time data transformation and analytics.

Scalability and performance

Redis is traditionally known for its vertical scaling, where you enhance the computational power of a single server to accommodate more data. This approach is straightforward but can become expensive and has limitations, especially when dealing with huge datasets. However, Redis isn't confined to vertical scaling alone; it also offers partitioning features that allow data distribution across multiple servers. While this horizontal partitioning does extend Redis's scalability, it comes with some limitations, such as increased complexity in data retrieval and potential issues with data consistency.

Kafka, on the other hand, is designed for horizontal scaling. This means adding more machines to your Kafka cluster to increase data handling capacity. The beauty of this approach lies in its simplicity and effectiveness; as your data needs grow, your Kafka cluster can also grow without requiring a significant overhaul of the existing infrastructure. This architecture makes Kafka incredibly scalable, allowing it to efficiently handle very high volumes of data . The horizontal scaling not only aids in accommodating more data but also enhances the system's overall performance, as tasks are distributed across multiple servers.

Fault tolerance and durability

Redis provides a range of features aimed at fault tolerance, including replication and partitioning. Replication allows Redis to create copies of data across multiple servers, enhancing data availability. Partitioning, on the other hand, distributes data across different servers to improve performance and fault tolerance. However, Redis does have its limitations when it comes to data durability. If not configured correctly—for instance, if disk persistence options like snapshotting or Append-Only Files (AOF) are not enabled—there's a risk of data loss in the event of a system failure.

Kafka takes fault tolerance and durability to another level. Designed with these concerns in mind, Kafka replicates data across multiple brokers in a cluster. This replication ensures that even if some servers fail, the data remains intact and accessible from the surviving servers. The distributed nature of Kafka's architecture provides a robust fault-tolerance mechanism, making it highly reliable for mission-critical applications that cannot afford any data loss.

Publish-Subscribe (Pub/Sub) Messaging

When it comes to implementing a Publish-Subscribe (pub/sub) messaging system, both Redis and Kafka offer distinct approaches, each with its own set of advantages and limitations.

Typical workflow

In Redis, the pub/sub model is straightforward. Publishers send messages to channels, and subscribers listen to those channels. The setup is simple, requiring minimal configuration.

On the other hand, Kafka's pub/sub model is more complex, involving producers, topics, and consumers. Producers publish messages to topics, and consumers subscribe to those topics. The architecture is distributed and requires a more involving initial setup.

Message handling

In Redis, messages are pushed to subscribers as they arrive, making it suitable for real-time messaging. However, once delivered, messages are not stored.

Kafka stores messages in a log structure, allowing consumers to read at their own pace. This enables more complex message processing.

Delivery and retention

Redis ensures low-latency delivery but doesn't guarantee message persistence or delivery acknowledgment. Additionally, Redis doesn't offer message retention in its pub/sub model. Messages are transient and disappear after delivery.

Kafka provides strong delivery guarantees, including at-least-once and exactly-once semantics, depending on the configuration. Furthermore, Kafka allows for message retention based on time or size, offering more flexibility for historical data analysis.

Error handling

Redis has limited error handling capabilities. If a subscriber is temporarily disconnected, it may misses any messages sent during the disconnection period.

Kafka's distributed nature provides robust error handling. If a consumer fails, it can resume from the last acknowledged offset, ensuring no message loss.

Redis Streams: The game changer

Redis Streams is a feature that brings Redis closer to Kafka in terms of data processing capabilities. It allows you to store, consume, and process streams of messages in a fault-tolerant and scalable manner. Redis Streams allows for storing messages in a log-like data structure, each with a unique identifier, offering a level of fault tolerance. This ensures that your data remains intact even if a part of your system encounters issues.

What makes Redis Streams particularly compelling is its support for Consumer Groups, a concept that mirrors Kafka's own Consumer Groups. This feature enables the distribution of data processing tasks across multiple consumers, allowing for horizontal scalability similar to what you'd experience in a Kafka environment. In essence, Redis Streams acts like a "mini-Kafka" within Redis, making it a versatile choice for various real-time data processing tasks such as event sourcing, message queuing, and complex event processing.

For a more visual guide on this topic, you can check out Understanding Streams in Redis and Kafka.

Decision factors

When it comes to choosing between Redis and Kafka, several factors come into play:

• Data volume: If you're dealing with high-volume data streams, Kafka is generally more suitable due to its horizontal scaling capabilities. Conversely, if low-latency is a priority, Redis is the better choice.
• System complexity: Redis is generally easier to set up than Kafka. With its distributed architecture, Kafka is better suited for complex systems requiring high fault.
• Specific use-cases: Redis excels in scenarios that require fast data access, such as caching, session storage, and real-time analytics. Kafka is more versatile and is ideal for complex data processing tasks, real-time analytics, and event sourcing.

Use cases for Redis and Kafka

For a quick comparison of Redis and Kafka across key use cases, see the table below.

Final thoughts

Choosing between Redis and Kafka is not a straightforward decision and depends on various factors, including your specific use cases, the volume of data you're dealing with and your system's complexity.

Both technologies have unique strengths and weaknesses, and understanding these can help you make a more informed choice. With the advent of features like Redis Streams, the line between Redis and Kafka is becoming increasingly blurred, adding another layer of complexity to the decision-making process.

Thanks for reading!

Article by

Joel Olawanle

Joel is a Frontend Engineer and Technical Writer. He is a passionate teacher with love for open source and has written over 250 technical articles majorly around JavaScript and its frameworks.

Got an article suggestion? Let us know

Explore more

Logging in Redis

Learn how to start logging with Redis and go from basics to best practices in no time.

Redis Caching in Go

Follow this step-by-step tutorial to learn how to use Redis caching in Golang to improve application performance

Best Redis Monitoring Tools

Redis is a popular in-memory database that is used for a variety of applications, including caching, real-time analytics, and session management. Effective Redis monitoring is essential for ensuring that your Redis instances are running smoothly and efficiently. In this article, we will discuss the 10 best Redis monitoring tools for 2024.

The Top 7 Log Shippers Explained

This article will help you choose the right log shipper for your needs, and will also provide a comparison of the top 6 log shippers on the market

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.