Diskless - The Cloud-Native Evolution of Kafka
In this blog we will go a bit deeper into the internal workings of KIP-1150 and compare it with Warpstream and Confluent Freight, exploring their architectural approaches, performance characteristics, costs, and operational aspects.
Diskless - The Cloud-Native Evolution of Kafka
In this blog we will go a bit deeper into the internal workings of KIP-1150 and compare it with Warpstream and Confluent Freight, exploring their architectural approaches, performance characteristics, costs, and operational aspects.
Introduction
Apache Kafka has been the backbone of streaming data infrastructure for years, but its disk-based storage model comes with operational complexity and cost challenges in cloud environments. Enter the era of diskless Kafka - a cloud-native evolution that leverages object storage like Amazon S3 for data persistence.
The Problem with Traditional Kafka
Traditional Kafka architecture relies on local disk storage on each broker:
- Operational Complexity: Managing disk capacity, replication, and rebalancing
- Cost Inefficiency: Over-provisioning storage to handle peak loads
- Recovery Time: Slow broker recovery due to data copying from replicas
- Scalability Limits: Tight coupling between compute and storage
KIP-1150: Kafka’s Native Approach
KIP-1150 introduces tiered storage to Apache Kafka, allowing segments to be offloaded to object storage while maintaining low-latency access to recent data.
Architecture
- Hot tier: Recent data on local disks for low latency
- Cold tier: Older data in object storage (S3, Azure Blob, etc.)
- Seamless access: Consumers can read from both tiers transparently
Benefits
- Reduced storage costs by 50-80%
- Faster broker recovery
- Decoupled storage and compute scaling
- Backward compatible with existing Kafka APIs
WarpStream: Purpose-Built Cloud-Native Kafka
WarpStream takes a more radical approach - eliminating local disks entirely and writing directly to object storage.
Key Innovations
- Agent-based architecture: Lightweight agents replace heavy brokers
- Zero disk I/O: All data writes go directly to S3
- Instant scaling: Add/remove agents without data movement
- Reduced operational burden: No rebalancing, no disk management
Performance Trade-offs
- Slightly higher write latency (~20-50ms vs. ~5ms traditional Kafka)
- Optimized for throughput over ultra-low latency
- Cost savings of 10x compared to traditional Kafka
Confluent Freight: Enterprise Cloud-Native Solution
Confluent Freight is Confluent’s answer to cloud-native Kafka, built on top of Apache Kafka with proprietary enhancements.
Features
- Separation of data and control planes
- Elastic scaling without data movement
- Multi-region replication built-in
- Fully managed service integration
Comparison Matrix
| Feature | Traditional Kafka | KIP-1150 | WarpStream | Confluent Freight |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Storage Backend | Local Disk | Disk + S3 | S3 Only | S3 + Proprietary |
| Write Latency | ~5ms | ~5-10ms | ~20-50ms | ~10-20ms |
| Storage Cost | High | Medium | Very Low | Medium |
| Operational Complexity | High | Medium | Low | Low |
| Scaling | Complex | Easier | Instant | Easy |
| Recovery Time | Minutes-Hours | Minutes | Seconds | Minutes |
When to Use Each
Traditional Kafka
- Ultra-low latency requirements (<5ms)
- On-premises deployments
- Mature operational expertise
KIP-1150
- Gradual migration from traditional Kafka
- Need backward compatibility
- Want to reduce storage costs incrementally
WarpStream
- Greenfield cloud deployments
- Cost optimization is priority
- Can tolerate 20-50ms latency
- Want minimal operational burden
Confluent Freight
- Enterprise support requirements
- Multi-region deployments
- Need fully managed solution
- Budget for premium pricing
Conclusion
The evolution toward diskless Kafka represents a fundamental shift in how we think about streaming data infrastructure in the cloud. While traditional Kafka remains relevant for specific use cases, cloud-native alternatives offer compelling advantages in cost, scalability, and operational simplicity.
The choice between KIP-1150, WarpStream, and Confluent Freight depends on your specific requirements around latency, cost, operational complexity, and migration path. As these technologies mature, we can expect further convergence and innovation in the space.
Comments & Discussion