> one is a message broker, and the other is a distributed streaming platform
I think this is an odd way of putting it. One is smart messaging; dumb clients. The other is dumb messaging; smart clients. It turns out the latter (i.e. Kafka) scales wonderfully so you can send more data, but you add complexity to your clients, who can't just now pluck messages off a queue to process, or have messages retry upon the first 3 failures, as they could with RabbitMQ.
Having said that, Kafka lets you keep all your data, so you don't have to worry about losing messages to unexpected interactions between RabbitMQ rules. But having said that, now you have to store all your data.
I think this is an odd way of putting it. One is smart messaging; dumb clients. The other is dumb messaging; smart clients. It turns out the latter (i.e. Kafka) scales wonderfully so you can send more data, but you add complexity to your clients, who can't just now pluck messages off a queue to process, or have messages retry upon the first 3 failures, as they could with RabbitMQ.
Having said that, Kafka lets you keep all your data, so you don't have to worry about losing messages to unexpected interactions between RabbitMQ rules. But having said that, now you have to store all your data.