AWS SQS vs. SNS: Differences & Comparison

Overview

Amazon Simple Queue Service (SQS) and Amazon Simple Notification Service (SNS) are two fundamental messaging services in the AWS ecosystem that facilitate communication between distributed systems. While they may appear similar at first glance, they serve different purposes and have distinct characteristics. This article provides a comprehensive comparison of SQS and SNS, covering their core concepts, key differences, integration capabilities, and best practices.

Core Concepts

AWS SQS: The Queue-Based Messaging Service

AWS SQS is a fully managed message queuing service that enables asynchronous communication between decoupled components of a distributed application[1]. It provides a reliable, highly scalable, and durable queue for storing messages until they are processed by consumers.

SQS operates on a pull-based delivery model, meaning consumers are responsible for retrieving messages from the queue and processing them[1][2]. This makes SQS ideal for workloads that can be processed asynchronously and require reliable message delivery, such as background tasks, batch jobs, and workload distribution[1].

SQS offers two queue types:

Standard queues : Provide maximum throughput, best-effort ordering, and at-least-once delivery
FIFO queues : Ensure exactly-once processing and preserve the order of messages

AWS SNS is a fully managed pub/sub messaging service designed to quickly send messages to multiple subscribers simultaneously[1][3]. Unlike SQS, SNS follows a push-based delivery model, automatically distributing messages to all registered subscribers when published to a topic[1][3].

SNS supports both Application-to-Application (A2A) and Application-to-Person (A2P) communication[15], with various subscription endpoints including:

AWS Lambda functions
SQS queues
HTTP/HTTPS endpoints
Email
SMS
Mobile push notifications

SNS also offers two types of topics:

Standard topics : Provide high throughput with best-effort ordering
FIFO topics : Ensure strict ordering and exactly-once message delivery but can only send messages to SQS FIFO queues[15]

Key Differences Between SQS and SNS

Message Delivery Model

Delivery Method	Pull-based	Push-based
Communication Pattern	Queue (one-to-one)	Pub/Sub (one-to-many)
Message Persistence	Stored until consumed (up to 14 days)	Not persistently stored
Consumer Behavior	Consumers poll for messages	Messages automatically pushed to subscribers

The fundamental distinction is that SQS doesn't push messages; instead, it holds them in a queue where they can be pulled and processed by consumers at their own pace[2]. In contrast, SNS automatically pushes messages to all registered subscribers simultaneously when published to a topic[1][3].

Delivery Mechanisms and Guarantees

Feature	SQS	SNS
Delivery Guarantee	At-least-once delivery	Best-effort delivery
Message Ordering	Standard: best-effort FIFO: strict ordering	Standard: no ordering guarantee FIFO: strict ordering
Message Retention	1 minute to 14 days	No long-term storage
Retry Capability	Visibility timeout-based retries	Configurable retry policy

SQS guarantees message durability, storing messages until they're consumed or reach their expiration time[2]. This ensures messages aren't lost even during system failures. SNS, however, attempts immediate delivery and relies on retry mechanisms for failed deliveries, but doesn't persist messages long-term[2].

Scalability and Throughput

Both services are designed to scale automatically, but they serve different scaling needs:

SQS excels at handling large volumes of messages that need reliable processing, allowing for buffering during traffic spikes and ensuring messages are processed even if consumers are temporarily unavailable
SNS is optimized for immediate, high-throughput message distribution to multiple endpoints simultaneously, making it ideal for real-time notifications and event broadcasting

Use Case Comparison

SQS	SNS
Decoupling microservices	Broadcasting notifications
Task queues for asynchronous processing	Real-time alerts and monitoring
Workload distribution	Fan-out messaging patterns
Buffering high-volume data	Push notifications to users
Reliable message processing	Triggering multiple workflows simultaneously

Integration Patterns

One powerful architecture pattern combines SNS and SQS to create a hybrid messaging model that leverages the strengths of both services[2][10]. In this "fanout" pattern:

A message is published to an SNS topic
The topic distributes the message to multiple subscribed SQS queues
Different services process messages from their dedicated queues independently

This pattern enables:

Broadcasting a single event to trigger multiple workflows
Parallel processing of the same event across different services
Independent scaling of each processing component
Buffering capability to handle traffic spikes while maintaining decoupling[10][13]

Implementation Steps

Create an SNS topic
Create multiple SQS queues for different processors
Subscribe each SQS queue to the SNS topic
Configure appropriate IAM permissions
Optionally, implement message filtering to route specific messages to specific queues[13]

This pattern is particularly valuable in microservice architectures where a single event might require multiple actions across different domains. For example, when a user places an order, the same event could trigger inventory updates, payment processing, and shipping notifications through separate queues[2].

Dead Letter Queues (DLQs)

Both SQS and SNS support Dead Letter Queues to handle failed message processing:

SQS DLQs : Capture messages that fail processing after a specified number of attempts
SNS DLQs : Store messages that couldn't be delivered to subscribed endpoints

Implementing DLQs is considered a best practice for both services to ensure no messages are lost and to facilitate troubleshooting of processing failures[7][8].

Configuration Best Practices

Security Considerations

Best Practice	Description
IAM Policies	Follow least privilege principle for SQS and SNS permissions[5]
Server-Side Encryption	Enable encryption for sensitive data[14]
Access Policies	Configure appropriate resource-based policies for topics and queues
VPC Endpoints	Use VPC endpoints to access services without internet exposure
Cross-Account Access	Use IAM roles with external IDs for secure cross-account access[5]

When using encrypted SQS queues with SNS, be sure to grant SNS the necessary KMS permissions to encrypt messages for the queue[14].

Performance Optimization

Message Batching : Use batch operations to reduce API call overhead
Long Polling : Configure SQS to use long polling (WaitTimeSeconds parameter) to reduce empty responses
Message Size Management : Keep messages small or use message pointers to data stored in S3
Concurrency : Scale consumers horizontally based on queue depth
Message Filtering : Use SNS message filters to prevent unnecessary processing[13]

Monitoring and Troubleshooting

Common issues and their solutions:

Issue	Troubleshooting Steps
Messages not being delivered	Check IAM permissions between SNS and SQS[8][14]
Delayed message processing	Verify visibility timeout settings and consumer scaling
Message duplication	Implement idempotent processing or use FIFO queues
Queue depth growing	Scale consumers or investigate processing bottlenecks
Encryption compatibility	Ensure SNS has proper KMS permissions for encrypted queues[14]

Choosing Between SQS and SNS

When to Use SQS

You need reliable, asynchronous processing with message persistence
You want to decouple components in a distributed system
You need to buffer requests during traffic spikes
Message ordering and exact-once processing are requirements (FIFO queues)
You want consumers to process messages at their own pace

When to Use SNS

You need to broadcast messages to multiple subscribers simultaneously
Real-time notification is a priority
You want to implement publish/subscribe patterns
You need to trigger multiple workflows from a single event
You require multiple delivery protocols (HTTP, email, SMS)

When to Use Both Together

You want to combine the fan-out capability of SNS with the reliability of SQS
You need to process the same event in multiple ways with different scaling requirements
You want to implement event-driven architectures with reliable message processing
You need to maintain loose coupling while ensuring message delivery

Conclusion

AWS SQS and SNS serve complementary roles in cloud-native architectures. While SQS provides reliable queue-based messaging for asynchronous processing and workload decoupling, SNS offers immediate push-based notifications for real-time event distribution.

Understanding the key differences between these services helps architects and developers choose the right messaging service for their specific use cases or combine them effectively to build resilient, scalable, and loosely coupled systems.

By leveraging SQS for reliable message processing, SNS for real-time notifications, and the fanout pattern to combine their strengths, organizations can build sophisticated event-driven architectures that handle varying workloads while maintaining high availability and performance.

If you find this content helpful, you might also be interested in our product AutoMQ. AutoMQ is a cloud-native alternative to Kafka by decoupling durability to S3 and EBS. 10x Cost-Effective. No Cross-AZ Traffic Cost. Autoscale in seconds. Single-digit ms latency. AutoMQ now is source code available on github. Big Companies Worldwide are Using AutoMQ. Check the following case studies to learn more:

Overview

Core Concepts

AWS SQS: The Queue-Based Messaging Service​

AWS SNS: The Publish-Subscribe Messaging Service​

Key Differences Between SQS and SNS

Message Delivery Model​

Delivery Mechanisms and Guarantees​

Scalability and Throughput​

Use Case Comparison​

Integration Patterns

The Fanout Pattern: Combining SNS with SQS​

Implementation Steps​

Dead Letter Queues (DLQs)​

Configuration Best Practices

Security Considerations​

Performance Optimization​

Monitoring and Troubleshooting​

Choosing Between SQS and SNS

When to Use SQS​

When to Use SNS​

When to Use Both Together​