Apache Camel vs Apache Kafka
As far as I know, Apache Kafka is asynchronous messaging platform, where as Apache Camel is a platform implementing the enterprise integration patterns.
So, what are the practical differences of Apache Camel and Apache Kafka? We planned to implement the system with Apache Camel, which is relatively easy, but our customer wanted the Apache Kafka instead without rational.
What would be the advantages of choosing Apache Kafka to implement a message queue functionality, which could be implemented with Apache Camel as well? I'm concerned Kafka would just introduce unnecessary overhead to project. Are we comparing apples and oranges?
What we need is straightforward API's to setup and use clustered message queues. Our initial plan was to use Camel to consume/produce on clustered JMS or ActiveMQ queues. How would Kafka make this task easier? The application itself would run on WebLogic server on either case.
The messaging would be point-to-point type, where there are multiple instances of same service running, but only one instance should process the message and emit the result according to load balancing policy. Message queues are also clustered, so neither failure of service instance or queue instance is SPOF.
Answer
Camel and Kafka are totally different things. In many use cases, camel is just used as a client of kafka/activemq/... .
Kafka and activemq are similar, but also different things, refer What is the difference between Apache kafka vs ActiveMQ. Kafka has higher throughput, and data always on disk, so a little more reliable than activemq.
Kafka is usually used as real-time data streaming, and in general activemq is mainly used for integration between applications, the book says so. But in most real world cases ,kafka and activemq can replace each other easily.