How do Kinesis and SQS compare in terms of performance?

How do Kinesis and SQS compare in terms of performance?

Kinesis is designed for real-time data streaming, while SQS is a message queuing service. Kinesis generally offers lower latency for processing streams, making it suitable for real-time analytics. SQS, on the other hand, is more suited for decoupling microservices and handling asynchronous workloads.

What are the key performance metrics to consider?

Key metrics include throughput, latency, and message retention. Kinesis can handle high throughput with low latency, while SQS offers reliable message delivery but may have higher latency due to its polling mechanism.

Which one is more cost-effective for high-volume data?

It depends on your use case. Kinesis can become expensive with high data volumes due to its pricing model based on data ingested and processed. SQS is generally cheaper for lower volumes but may incur costs based on message retrieval and retention.

Can you give examples of use cases for each?

Sure! Kinesis is great for real-time analytics, like processing streaming data from IoT devices. SQS is ideal for decoupling services, such as handling background jobs in a web application.