glusterfsvsRabbitMQ
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| glusterfs | RabbitMQ | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 63/100 | 77/100 |
| Rank in category | #3 of 7 in Distributed Storage | #3 of 12 in Message Broker |
| GitHub stars | 5 266 | 13 949 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +24 | +78 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 0 | 14 |
| Latest release | — | v4.3.7 · 20 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Advanced | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes |
| License | GPL-2.0 | Other |
| Main language | C | JavaScript |
Which one should you pick?
RabbitMQ scores 77/100 against 63/100 for glusterfs, so it is the safer default.
RabbitMQ ships more often: 14 stable releases in the past year, against 0 for glusterfs.
If you want the quickest setup, RabbitMQ is easier to run; glusterfs needs more configuration.
RabbitMQ is growing faster right now (+78 stars in 30 days).
glusterfs details →RabbitMQ details →
Swap a project
Keep glusterfs, compare it with
Keep RabbitMQ, compare it with