Databases · head to head
Apache Pulsar vs Memcached
Apache Pulsar
Databases
Cloud-native messaging and streaming with separated storage
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Each has a real cost: Apache Pulsar more components than Kafka: brokers, BookKeeper and ZooKeeper each need operating; Memcached no persistence at all: restart a node and its cache is gone, which every design must assume
- They diverge on capability: Apache Pulsar covers Separated storage, Memcached covers In-memory key-value cache.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Apache Pulsar and Memcached actually diverge.
| Attribute | Apache Pulsar | Memcached |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | Open source, no licence fee | Open source, no licence fee; managed cloud billed separately |
| Platforms | Linux, Docker, Kubernetes, Self-hosted | Linux, macOS, Windows, Docker, Self-hosted |
Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Databases).
What each one covers
Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.
Only in Apache Pulsar
- Separated storage
- Queuing and streaming
- Built-in multi-tenancy
- Geo-replication
Only in Memcached
- In-memory key-value cache
- Multithreaded
- Client-side sharding
- Predictable memory use
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
Apache Pulsar
- Platforms needing both work queues and replayable streams without running two systemsnot Memcached
- Multi-tenant messaging where isolation between teams is a requirementnot Memcached
- Deployments where storage and traffic grow at genuinely different ratesnot Memcached
Memcached
- Caching expensive database query results to cut loadnot Apache Pulsar
- Session storage where losing sessions on restart is acceptablenot Apache Pulsar
- Fronting an API whose responses are costly and change slowlynot Apache Pulsar
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
Apache Pulsar
- More components than Kafka: brokers, BookKeeper and ZooKeeper each need operating
- Correspondingly harder to run well, and the expertise is rarer than Kafka expertise
- A much smaller ecosystem of connectors, tooling and hiring pool than Kafka
- The architectural advantages only pay off at a scale most deployments never reach
Memcached
- No persistence at all: restart a node and its cache is gone, which every design must assume
- No replication or failover, so losing a node loses that share of the cache
- Only simple key-value, with none of the lists, sorted sets or streams Redis offers
- Values are capped at 1MB by default, which surprises teams caching large documents
Pricing, plan by plan
Apache Pulsar
Free- Apache PulsarFree
- Full functionality
- No usage limits
- Community support
Memcached
Free- MemcachedFree
- Full functionality
- Self-hosted
- No usage limits
Which should you pick?
Choose Apache Pulsar if
- You need separated storage.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Linux, Docker, Kubernetes, Self-hosted.
- You also want queuing and streaming.
Choose Memcached if
- You need in-memory key-value cache.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Linux, macOS, Windows, Docker, Self-hosted.
- You also want multithreaded.
Questions people ask
- Is Apache Pulsar or Memcached better?
- Neither clearly leads. Apache Pulsar starts at Free and Memcached at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, Apache Pulsar or Memcached?
- Apache Pulsar starts at Free and Memcached at Free.
- Does Apache Pulsar or Memcached run on more platforms?
- Apache Pulsar runs on Linux, Docker, Kubernetes, Self-hosted. Memcached runs on Linux, macOS, Windows, Docker, Self-hosted.
- Can I use Apache Pulsar for free?
- Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
- What is Apache Pulsar best used for?
- Apache Pulsar is most often used for platforms needing both work queues and replayable streams without running two systems, multi-tenant messaging where isolation between teams is a requirement, deployments where storage and traffic grow at genuinely different rates. Of those, platforms needing both work queues and replayable streams without running two systems and multi-tenant messaging where isolation between teams is a requirement are not what Memcached is typically brought in for.
- What can Apache Pulsar do that Memcached cannot?
- Apache Pulsar covers Separated storage, Queuing and streaming, Built-in multi-tenancy, Geo-replication. Memcached covers In-memory key-value cache, Multithreaded, Client-side sharding, Predictable memory use.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
Apache Pulsar: Is Apache Pulsar free?
Yes, open source under the Apache Software Foundation.
Memcached: Is Memcached free?
Yes, open source with no licence fee.
Apache Pulsar: Pulsar or Kafka?
Pulsar separates storage from compute and covers queuing and streaming in one system. Kafka has a far larger ecosystem and hiring pool. Most teams should have a specific reason before choosing Pulsar.
Memcached: Memcached or Redis?
Memcached is a pure cache: simpler, multithreaded and very predictable. Redis adds persistence, replication and rich data structures, which is why it is the default choice unless you specifically want a cache and nothing more.
Apache Pulsar: Why does separated storage matter?
Brokers hold no data, so adding or replacing one requires no rebalancing, and storage can grow without adding serving capacity.
Memcached: Does Memcached persist data?
No. Everything is in memory and lost on restart, by design.
Related pages
More on Apache Pulsar
Other head to heads
- Apache Pulsar vs Cockroach Labs
- Apache Pulsar vs PostgreSQL
- Apache Pulsar vs Airtable
- Apache Pulsar vs Amazon Aurora
- Apache Pulsar vs Elasticsearch
- Apache Pulsar vs PlanetScale
- Apache Pulsar vs Meilisearch
- Apache Pulsar vs Turso
- Apache Pulsar vs Azure SQL
- Apache Pulsar vs ClickHouse
- Apache Pulsar vs Couchbase
- Apache Pulsar vs DuckDB
- Apache Pulsar vs MariaDB
- Apache Pulsar vs Oracle Database
- Apache Pulsar vs DataGrip
- Apache Pulsar vs Firebolt
- Apache Pulsar vs Google Cloud SQL
- Apache Pulsar vs MotherDuck
- Apache Pulsar vs Apache Kafka
- Memcached vs Cockroach Labs
- Memcached vs PostgreSQL
- Memcached vs Airtable
- Memcached vs Amazon Aurora
- Memcached vs Elasticsearch
- Memcached vs PlanetScale
- Memcached vs Meilisearch
- Memcached vs Turso
- Memcached vs Azure SQL
- Memcached vs ClickHouse
- Memcached vs Couchbase
- Memcached vs DuckDB
- Memcached vs MariaDB
- Memcached vs Oracle Database
- Memcached vs DataGrip
- Memcached vs Firebolt
- Memcached vs Google Cloud SQL
- Memcached vs MotherDuck
- Memcached vs Apache Kafka