We performed a comparison between Apache Kafka, Aurea CX Messenger, and VMware RabbitMQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, IBM, Amazon Web Services (AWS) and others in Message Queue (MQ) Software.
"I like the performance and reliability of Kafka. I needed a data streaming buffer that could handle thousands of messages per second with at least one processing point for an analytics pipeline. Kafka fits this requirement very well."
"The main advantage is increased reliability, particularly with regard to data and the speed with which messages are published to the other side."
"Apache Kafka is scalable. It is easy to add brokers."
"The most valuable feature is the support for a high volume of data."
"It seemed pretty stable and didn't have any issues at all."
"With Kafka, events and streaming are persistent, and multiple subscribers can consume the data. This is an advantage of Kafka compared to simple queue-based solutions."
"Ease of use."
"The solution is very scalable. We started with a cluster of three and then scaled it to seven."
"The Messenger Broker is a really good feature."
"The features that I have found most valuable are that it is very easy to develop. Most of it is graphical, but we also have the option to add any custom call that you need."
"The solution offers excellent stability."
"SDM: User-friendly tool which allows for a seamless approach to performing hotfixes, if required."
"ESB: Provides all kind of possibilities to resolve business needs. A lot of ready to use services plus custom Java services. I used a lot of them all."
"The solution is highly scalable, this is very important for us. It can handle a lot of messages."
"Very sophisticated routing control and priority messaging capabilities"
"I like the high throughput of 20K messages/sec, and that it supports multiple protocols."
"We have been able to set up a messaging system that facilitates data integration between the software modules that we sell."
"The most valuable feature is asynchronous calls, which are easy to configure."
"The solution has really cool features to use. Its management console is excellent. You can utilize plugins to view the performance of the whole service on one network."
"The security is great."
"RabbitMQ will help to remove a lot of the complexities and create a loosely coupled codebase."
"It can be configured to be a very fast message broker. I like the stability, the built-in admin tools and plugin architecture."
"I would like to see monitoring service tools."
"Apache Kafka could improve data loss and compatibility with Spark."
"Stability of the API and the technical support could be improved."
"In Apache Kafka, it is currently difficult to create a consumer."
"Managing Apache Kafka can be a challenge, but there are solutions. I used the newest release, as it seems they have removed Zookeeper, which should make it easier. Confluent provides a fully managed Kafka platform, in which the cluster does not need to be managed."
"More Windows support, I believe, is one area where it can improve."
"The product is good, but it needs implementation and on-going support. The whole cloud engagement model has made the adoption of Kafka better due to PaaS (Amazon Kinesis, a fully managed service by AWS)."
"In the next release, I would like for there to be some authorization and HTL security."
"I don't know if the last version has the cloud option, but maybe that could be good. That could be something that is included."
"You should not hurry with upgrades without testing the whole product completely."
"It should include/add more services with the product as per market demand. It should include custom Java services developed by any organization or provide a platform where users/developers can share ideas/custom services, etc."
"The solution needs to improve support for new, more recent protocols on the API."
"The improvement is that it should be on the cloud and use web services."
"Aurea CX Messenger could improve by making better use of the new APIs"
"When you have complex tasks, RabbitMQ is hard to use."
"The user interface could be improved."
"Implementing a circuit breaker scenario using RabbitMQ is complicated. This complexity arises because manual intervention is required to manage worker details and handle operations based on worker IP addresses."
"The product is pretty hard to configure."
"The product has to improve the crisis management, especially in memory issues."
"RabbitMQ is clearly better supported on Linux than it is on Windows. There are idiosyncrasies in the Windows version that are not there on Linux."
"The debugging capabilities and testing flexibilities need to be improved."
"The support feature could benefit from some improvement in terms of accessibility and responsiveness."
