moquette

Pros of paho.mqtt.java

• More comprehensive MQTT client library with support for various MQTT versions
• Better documentation and wider community support
• Actively maintained with regular updates and bug fixes

Cons of paho.mqtt.java

• Larger codebase and potentially higher resource usage
• Steeper learning curve for beginners due to more features
• Lacks built-in broker functionality (client-only library)

Code Comparison

Moquette (Server setup):

final IConfig config = new MemoryConfig(new Properties());
final Server server = new Server();
server.startServer(config);

paho.mqtt.java (Client connection):

MqttClient client = new MqttClient("tcp://localhost:1883", "ClientId");
MqttConnectOptions options = new MqttConnectOptions();
client.connect(options);

While Moquette focuses on providing a lightweight MQTT broker, paho.mqtt.java is primarily a client library. Moquette's code snippet demonstrates server setup, whereas paho.mqtt.java shows client connection. paho.mqtt.java offers more flexibility for client-side MQTT operations, while Moquette is better suited for implementing a simple MQTT broker.

Pros of emqx/emqx

• Scalable and high-performance MQTT broker, capable of handling millions of concurrent connections
• Supports a wide range of MQTT features, including WebSocket, TLS, and clustering
• Extensive plugin system for customizing and extending the broker's functionality

Cons of emqx/emqx

• Larger codebase and more complex to set up compared to Moquette
• May have a steeper learning curve for users unfamiliar with MQTT brokers
• Potential performance overhead for smaller-scale deployments

Code Comparison

Moquette (5 lines):

public class Server {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        Server server = new Server();
        server.startServer();
    }
}

emqx (5 lines):

-module(emqx_app).

start(_Type, _Args) ->
    emqx_logger:init(),
    emqx_sup:start_link().

Pros of HiveMQ Community Edition

• Robust and feature-rich MQTT broker with enterprise-grade capabilities
• Extensive documentation and community support
• Supports advanced MQTT features like retained messages, last will and testament, and more

Cons of HiveMQ Community Edition

• Closed-source, with a commercial license required for production use
• May have a steeper learning curve compared to Moquette
• Potential vendor lock-in concerns for some users

Code Comparison

Moquette (MQTT Broker):

public class Server {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        Server server = new Server();
        server.startServer();
    }

    private void startServer() {
        MoquetteServerBootstrapper bootstrapper = new MoquetteServerBootstrapper();
        bootstrapper.startServer();
    }
}

HiveMQ Community Edition (MQTT Broker):

public class HiveMQEntryPoint {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        HiveMQEntryPoint entryPoint = new HiveMQEntryPoint();
        entryPoint.start();
    }

    private void start() {
        HiveMQServer hiveMQServer = new HiveMQServer();
        hiveMQServer.start();
    }
}

Pros of MQTT.org

• MQTT.org is the official website and repository for the MQTT protocol, providing authoritative information and resources.
• The repository contains the MQTT protocol specification, which is the definitive reference for the protocol.
• The website offers a comprehensive set of documentation, including tutorials, client libraries, and broker implementations.

Cons of MQTT.org

• The repository is primarily focused on the protocol specification and documentation, rather than providing a specific implementation of the MQTT broker.
• The repository does not contain any code for a broker implementation, which may be a limitation for users looking for a ready-to-use MQTT broker.

Code Comparison

Moquette-io/Moquette (MQTT Broker Implementation):

public class Server {
    private static final Logger LOG = LoggerFactory.getLogger(Server.class);

    private final MoquetteIdleTimeoutHandler idleHandler;
    private final MoquetteNettyInitializer initializer;
    private final MoquetteNettyBridge bridge;
    private final MoquetteNettyBootstrapper bootstrapper;

    public Server() {
        this.idleHandler = new MoquetteIdleTimeoutHandler();
        this.initializer = new MoquetteNettyInitializer(idleHandler);
        this.bridge = new MoquetteNettyBridge();
        this.bootstrapper = new MoquetteNettyBootstrapper(initializer, bridge);
    }

    // ...
}

MQTT.org (Protocol Specification):

3.1.2.1 CONNECT Packet
The CONNECT packet is the first packet sent from the Client to the Server. It is used by the Client to request a connection to the Server.

Fixed header
The fixed header format is:

Bit 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
byte 1 MQTT Control Packet type (1)
Bit 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
byte 2 Remaining Length

Pros of Mosquitto

• Written in C, offering better performance and lower resource usage
• Mature project with extensive documentation and community support
• Supports a wider range of MQTT features and versions

Cons of Mosquitto

• Less portable than Java-based alternatives
• More complex to set up and configure for beginners
• Requires compilation for different platforms

Code Comparison

Mosquitto (C):

int mosquitto_publish(struct mosquitto *mosq, int *mid, const char *topic, int payloadlen, const void *payload, int qos, bool retain);

Moquette (Java):

public void publish(String topic, byte[] message, QOSType qos, boolean retained) throws MqttException;

Both implementations provide similar functionality for publishing MQTT messages, but Mosquitto's C implementation offers more fine-grained control over message parameters.

Mosquitto is a robust, high-performance MQTT broker suitable for production environments and resource-constrained devices. Moquette, being Java-based, offers better portability and ease of use for Java developers, but may have higher resource requirements. The choice between the two depends on specific project needs, performance requirements, and development preferences.

Pros of VerneMQ

• VerneMQ is a highly scalable and fault-tolerant MQTT broker, capable of handling a large number of concurrent connections and messages.
• It supports a wide range of MQTT features, including QoS levels, retained messages, and WebSocket support.
• VerneMQ has a modular design, allowing for easy customization and integration with other systems.

Cons of VerneMQ

• VerneMQ may have a steeper learning curve compared to Moquette, especially for users new to MQTT brokers.
• The documentation for VerneMQ, while comprehensive, may not be as user-friendly as Moquette's.
• VerneMQ may have a higher resource footprint compared to Moquette, depending on the specific use case and deployment requirements.

Code Comparison

Here's a brief code comparison between Moquette and VerneMQ:

Moquette (Java):

public class MoquetteServer {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        final Server server = new Server();
        server.startServer();
        Runtime.getRuntime().addShutdownHook(new Thread(() -> server.stopServer()));
    }
}

VerneMQ (Erlang):

-module(vmq_server_app).
-behaviour(application).

start(_Type, _Args) ->
    vmq_server_sup:start_link().

stop(_State) ->
    ok.