Mule ESB Reviews

Mule ESB acts as an intermediary that assists with integration between multiple layers.

Mule ESB is quite lightweight.

Everything runs in Java, which is a useful feature.

There are some issues with both stability and scalability.

I have experienced some issues with clustering.

We have been using Mule ESB for probably three years.

The stability of this product can be improved.

I have had a couple of issues with scalability. Our use case has traffic that depends a lot on the SDK, so there are a lot of users.

The LAN team has been in contact with technical support.

Prior to Mule ESB, we were using an IBM solution that was pretty good. Mule ESB is cheaper but I would choose the IBM product instead.

The installation and setup had been completed before I joined the company.

This product is cheaper than some offered by other vendors, although there is a problem because you have to pay for some third-party adapters.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

In order of importance:

- Connectors

- Data Weave

- Mule Expression Language

It has changed our approach towards integration, making plumbing functions such as HTTP/Messaging listener services, data transformation and connection handling redundant.

Documentation is cryptic, product releases are far too frequent, and upgrades become troublesome.

1 year as a developer and architect.

Deployment of custom flows is troublesome and fraught with difficulty

DataWeave: It allows for complex mappings using a simple DSL (Domain Specific Language).

Integration between systems can often take several days. However, with MuleSoft ESB, it can take as little as fifteen minutes.

The CloudHub offering requires some time to mature. However, it is a good overall solution.

Some further details:

1. The AnypointMQ offering is not very stable, as such can cause issues
when dealing with high volume burst messages.

2. The CloudHub offering is EC2 instance based and does not run in
containers.

3. The speed of the CloudHub user interface is poor.

4. Deployment takes several minutes (due to Ec2 architecture as opposed to
containerization).

5. There is currently no cross application object store.

I have used MuleSoft ESB for six years.

CloudHub stability has been an issue. However, this is being worked on.

The product scales very well.

Technical support is superb. The engineers that support customers are Java developers and have a deep understanding of the issues and resolutions. This is one of the biggest selling points for MuleSoft.

Previously, we used Apache Camel and Spring Integration. However, they require more technical involvement than MuleSoft ESB.

The setup is done with a simple deployable .zip file. It is very simple to set up and run.

Pricing is tailored to the customer. As such, I would recommend speaking with your account representative.

We evaluated Dell Boomi, Informatica, and Talend. However, for the given use case, MuleSoft came out on top.

Focus on the business problem you want to solve, as the technical integration in MuleSoft is relatively simple.

• API integration with many backend systems, deployment options, testing. 
• It helps me to manage API as well.

• For API creation and integrations in agile mode.
• Reduces the development cost and time as we work in agile mode.

Connectors: It has many connectors and components that really help to complete the development very quickly.

• Support, and with respect to licensing cost.
• Many of the customers feel that the licensing cost is much.

The integration of an ERP system with a payment system in order to improve accounting information and invoice management.

We have seen a significant improvement in our processes: Response time decreased significantly and integration of services became faster.

The architecture based on events: It has several connectors which allow integration from external and internal applications of the company.

• The payment system
• The accounting and financial areas
• The provisioning and enrollment system, because the response time was short.