HI All, https://nats.io/about/
this shows a general comparison of sender/receiver throughputs for NATS and other messaging system including our favourite Kafka. It appears that Kafka, despite taking the 2nd place, has a very low throughput. My question is, where does Kafka win over NATS? is it the unique partitioning and delivery semantics? Or, is it something else. >From what I can see, NATS has traditional pub/sub and queuing. But it doesn't look like there is any proper retention system built for this. Has anyone come across this already? Thanks,
