Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [mosquitto-dev] Differences between paho-c and mosquitto
The Paho C++ library was developed in the early days when the project first joined Eclipse. The goal was to see if the Paho Java API could be easily replicated in "Modern C++" (i.e. C++11), particularly in regard to memory management and the use of asynchronous "Token" objects which act much like futures/promises. This all worked out well, and that's still one of the selling points for the Paho libraries - that there are parallel implementations for the different languages. But really, the basics are there for most MQTT implementations.
The primary target for the Paho C++ library from day one has been ARM Linux gateways and edge devices, primarily for Debian and Yocto distributions, so they are guaranteed to work. And most development is done on x86_64 Mint and Ubuntu, so ditto there.
Both libraries are actively maintained, heavily used, and meant to be production quality. So compare features, size, complexity. Either will work depending on your needs. 

Frank

On 3/13/19 9:45 AM, Roger Light wrote:

Dear Kristóf,

If you are strictly interested in a C++ implementation, then I would
definitely recommend the Paho C++ library. The Mosquitto C++ library
is a very very thin wrapper around the C library and was made in
response to a request back when there were no C++ implementations at
all. As it stands now, the Paho C++ library exposes many more C++
features. The Mosquitto C++ wrapper has been listed as deprecated on
the roadmap as of 1.6 for a little while now. That is in no small part
down to the Paho library providing a better C++ wrapper and not
wanting to duplicate unnecessary work. If you still want the features
of the Mosquitto C++ library, the C library isn't going away, and
because it is such a thin wrapper it is very straightforward to switch
from one to the other.

The reason that the Mosquitto and Paho C client libraries both exist
is historical to a large extent. The Mosquitto code started in public
in a similar timeframe to when what became the Paho library was
developed. The Paho code joined Eclipse before Mosquitto. Mosquitto
didn't remove the client library when it joined Eclipse because it was
already in reasonably wide use, it supports the mosquitto command line
clients, and probably most importantly because a good chunk of the
client code is used inside the broker itself. Making libmosquitto
available as well as the broker is a relatively small amount of
effort.

https://mosquitto.org/roadmap/

Regards,

Roger

On Wed, 13 Mar 2019 at 12:46, Mark Oeltjenbruns
<mark.oeltjenbruns@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

  Mainly I am interested in when I should choose mosquittopp and when paho.mqtt.cpp?

I started with the mosquitto library and found it fairly easy to work with.  The error handling has been a bit vague, but then our security group has wanted some 'interesting' restrictions placed on communications with a broker, so that may be part of the issue.

Lately I've used paho, in the same application.  I refactored my implementation to be able to use either library at run time.  They are implemented using slightly different approaches, but overall the details where not that significant.  I've had a lot more experience with the mosquitto suite. I have nothing against paho but would suggest mosquitto based on my experience with it.
Why would I need 2 MQTT clients?  The application group thought that websockets and SOCKS5 support is now a mandatory requirement.
This is where having to use non-MQTT binary protocol comes into play.  Mosquitto supported SOCKS5, but not websockets and paho supported websockets but not SOCKS5. Perhaps this has changed since then.

- Fast C/C++ bugs fixes and supports.

I struggled with the SOCKS5 setup and just couldn't get it to work.  Thinking perhaps it wasn't something on my end I reached out to this list.  Very quickly Roger Light had agreed it was a problem and had a fix for me in a short period of time.  [In case of searching emails, SOCKS5 did not work correctly with TLS connections.]  He also issued an official release with the patch he sent me applied not long after as well.
I have not had to contact the paho group so can't comment on that aspect.

- The project is compiled on AMD and ARM architecture, used OS: Ubuntu and Debian.

My application is for embedded products running PowerPC cores, have used it on PCs and ARMS, although to be honest, I'm pretty sure both code bases are written pretty generic with no operating or CPU special requirements.

- stability, robustness.

I found both to be very reliable.
Another reason to go with mosquitto is that it also contains a broker, which AFAICT paho does not at this point.  I've had to work with several different brokers and found several issues with some of them.  It was very crucial for me to be able to have very fine control over the broker setup to minimize the debug surface.  Again, this is partly due to the unusual security requirements.

My one complaint about the paho project is it is so confusing at first which of the many options to use.  Since my only criteria was the websockets support, the decision was made for me as only one option had it at the time.  From that perspective I again found mosquitto a better option as it is very clear what it is and what it contains.

I have seen there are two directions of development of this topic by eclipse.

If there is someone here that can answer that I'd be interested in why this is so.  It seems like focusing efforts on improving one solid code base would be better in the long run.


On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 2:32 AM Kristóf Makó <makokristof@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi all,

I would like to apply a robust MQTT cpp library on linux system in my project. I have seen there are two directions of development of this topic by eclipse. Which one is called mosquittopp (https://github.com/eclipse/mosquitto) and second one is called paho.mqtt.cpp (https://github.com/eclipse/paho.mqtt.cpp). Whereas I found a few of forum in this topic, I can't decide which is the best from aspects like up-to-date, robustness, stability.

Mainly I am interested in when I should choose mosquittopp and when paho.mqtt.cpp?

Probably the answer lies in details, I saw mosquittopp based on mosquitto until paho.mqtt.cpp based on paho.mqtt.c. Which are the differents between two C library?

Most important aspects for me:
- The project is compiled on AMD and ARM architecture, used OS: Ubuntu and Debian.
- Fast C/C++ bugs fixes and supports.
- stability, robustness.

If this question already asked, I am sorry and please link to me that section of topic where I can find the answer.

Thanking your reply in advance.
Best regards,
Makó Kristóf
_______________________________________________
mosquitto-dev mailing list
mosquitto-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/mosquitto-dev

_______________________________________________
mosquitto-dev mailing list
mosquitto-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/mosquitto-dev

_______________________________________________
mosquitto-dev mailing list
mosquitto-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/mosquitto-dev

Back to the top