# glusterfs vs RabbitMQ

> 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).

## Details

- [glusterfs](https://selfhost.directory/project/glusterfs) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/glusterfs.md)
- [RabbitMQ](https://selfhost.directory/project/rabbitmq) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/rabbitmq.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/glusterfs-vs-rabbitmq