CODEWITHSUNDEEP
apache-kafkaspring-cloud-streamconfluent-schema-registry
pacman
pacman

Reputation: 835

Confluent schema registry vs Spring cloud schema registry

I have been looking at spring cloud schema registry and confluent schema registry for now. I could see a few difference such as spring cloud schema registry saves schemas in normal database and by default in h2 whereas confluent schema registry is saved in kafka topic.

Is there any performance impact to this approach for spring cloud schema registry. As far as I understood even though the data is kept on topic in case of confluent there would still be a delay in querying it. But would there be a major impact?

Also I could see that spring cloud schema registry provides support for confluent schema registry, does that mean confluent schema registry is better?

Is there any fundamental difference in working of these schema registries?

What is the need for spring cloud schema registry if the confluent schema registry was already available?

Upvotes: 1

Views: 953

Answers (1)

sobychacko
sobychacko

Reputation: 5904

From a Spring Cloud Stream Kafka perspective, it is recommended to use the Confluent Schema Registry. It is fairly easy to integrate Spring Cloud Stream with Confluent Schema Registry. There are a few samples available here demonstrating that. Spring Cloud Schema Registry is a project that is in maintenance mode and we may not add any further features to it. There is not much advantage of using Spring Cloud Schema registry if you are using Kafka. Spring Cloud Schema registry may become useful if you are performing schema evolution against a non-Kafka middleware system such as RabbitMQ, AWS Kinesis, etc. As you noted, by default it uses the H2 database and you can configure it for other databases. If you find any issues with the integration between Spring Cloud Stream and Confluent Schema Registry, please raise them in the Kafka Binder GH repository.

Upvotes: 2

Related Questions