Coming October 25: PeerSpot Awards will be announced! Learn more
Buyer's Guide
Message Queue (MQ) Software
September 2022
Get our free report covering IBM, Apache, Apache, and other competitors of VMware RabbitMQ. Updated: September 2022.
634,550 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Read reviews of VMware RabbitMQ alternatives and competitors

Head Of Operations at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Vendor
Top 20
Highly scalable, easy to use, and entirely robust
Pros and Cons
  • "I have found the solution to be very robust. It has a strong reputation, easy to use, simple to configure in our enterprise software, and supports all the protocols that we use."
  • "Everything in the solution could be simplified a little. We have trouble with the configuration and cost which is mostly an internal issue, but nevertheless, the errors do come up when there are configuration changes across a specific version. We have slightly different versions, which may have slightly different configurations which cause issues."

What is our primary use case?

We have two different use cases for this solution. We use it for the interactive interconnectivity between clients into the cloud and applications communicating within our enterprise software.

What is most valuable?

I have found the solution to be very robust. It has a strong reputation, easy to use, simple to configure in our enterprise software, and supports all the protocols that we use.

What needs improvement?

Everything in the solution could be simplified a little. We have trouble with the configuration and cost which is mostly an internal issue, but nevertheless, the errors do come up when there are configuration changes across a specific version. We have slightly different versions, which may have slightly different configurations which cause issues.

It is intensive to maintain and train people to use the application. There has to be a certain amount of education going into the developers, as well as the infrastructure staff. This could be improved.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using IBM MQ for approximately 20 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is very stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We have found the solution is highly scalable. It is very easy to scale horizontally, we can scale across and make another instance of the application if we need to.

We have approximately 2,000 to 10,000 are using this solution in my organization.

How are customer service and technical support?

The quality of service can vary depending on the level of support for different issues. If it is on an issue with what IBM does within their cloud that they control as an ASP it can be somewhat complicated because it is not visible to us. They only support and run the model for us. They will do the updates, manage, and make sure everything is working, it is an effective service but if we have an issue, we do not get that much of a response from them. However, when it is on-premise with us on our side and we talk directly to IBM and they support us fully for the application. 

How was the initial setup?

The installation can be fairly simple, but when changes or modifications are necessary within the system for the implementation it can be a bit difficult. We standardize a lot of the process whether it is using Jenkins or Pipelines, or another solution to make it as simple as possible. However, when we make changes and more errors and configuration problems come up, it can be quite difficult to narrow down those problems. Generally, we automate most of this part which has limited the impact but the process could be improved.

Since we automate a lot of the deployment elements I am not sure the breakdown of how long it takes for each part, but typically all together it takes approximately half a day.

What about the implementation team?

We do the implementation of the solution.

This solution is a message exchanges system for queuing messages. The messages come in and if they are rejected or if they fail to be received, they sometimes fall into something that is called a dead letter queue, queues that are dead, or queues that are ineffective. Those have to be maintained and monitored at all times. There is quite a lot of attention needed. It is extremely critical and the robustness is extreme when it is on the edge. When it is in the enterprise is not that bad, but if it is on the edge, outward-facing to the client, we do a lot of work to maintain and ensure that it is working at all times.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

You have to license per application installation and if you expand vertically or horizontally, you will be paying for more licenses. The licenses are approximately $10,000 to $15,000 a license, it can get expensive quite quickly.

We maintain and support a lot of applications across a wide enterprise. Therefore the cost of licenses increases with each individual implementation of a client because we have to pay for licenses. We are looking for an alternative solution to reduce costs by going to an open-source messaging system because we do not need the robustness of IBM MQ.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I have evaluated Rabbit MQ.

What other advice do I have?

If you want a robust enterprise application that you know is going to be around that you can trust and you are very comfortable with the concept that you are going to pay for that stability and robustness, then IBM MQ is the best choice. If you are on a lighter throughput or you do not need to worry about the robustness as much then Rabbit MQ could be the better choice. It is a fairly stable application, and it works very well but you do not have that industrialization and long-term code benefit that you receive from IBM WebSphere. If your use case and budget fit then this solution would be a great choice.

We have used the application for a long time. I understand it, how it works and therefore I feel comfortable with it. From a pure usage standpoint, it is great. It will handle anything, but you have to be willing to understand that you are getting into something you cannot go backward on very easily. You cannot easily swap another suitable or similar application out without a lot of work involved. You have to be very careful what you are trying to accomplish with your software.

I rate IBM MQ an eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Hybrid Cloud
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
Ravi Kuppusamy - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO and Founder at BAssure Solutions
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Plenty of adapters, beneficial for enterprises, and high availability
Pros and Cons
  • "Apache Kafka has good integration capabilities and has plenty of adapters in its ecosystem if you want to build something. There are adapters for many platforms, such as Java, Azure, and Microsoft's ecosystem. Other solutions, such as Pulsar have fewer adapters available."
  • "Pulsar gives more scalability to an even grouping, but Apache Kafka is used more if you want to send something in a time series-based. If this does not matter to you then Pulsar could be more customizable. Apache Kafka is nothing but a streaming system with local storage."

What is our primary use case?

We are building solutions on Apache Kafka for four customers. The customers we have are in various sectors, such as healthcare and architecture.

What is most valuable?

Apache Kafka has good integration capabilities and has plenty of adapters in its ecosystem if you want to build something. There are adapters for many platforms, such as Java, Azure, and Microsoft's ecosystem. Other solutions, such as Pulsar have fewer adapters available.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Apache Kafka for three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Apache Kafka is stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I would recommend Apache Kafka for any enterprise.

The amount of people using the solution depends on the application. However, the starting point is from 6,000 to 7,000 concurrent users.

How are customer service and support?

There is not any support, Apache Kafka is open-source.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We have been experimenting with other solutions such as VMware RabbitMQ and Pulsar.

We are going to replace the Apache Kafka solution using Pulsar.

Pulsar gives more scalability to an even grouping, but Apache Kafka is used more if you want to send something in a time series-based. If this does not matter to you then Pulsar could be more customizable. Apache Kafka is nothing but a streaming system with local storage. Apache Kafka fits into many use cases, it's very direct, but if you want more specific use cases and you use Apache Kafka, Pulsar could be considered.

How was the initial setup?

Apache Kafka was simple to install. If you have a complicated clustered production, it takes time. However, for the development, it doesn't take more than one or two hours.

What about the implementation team?

We have approximately two to four technical managers that are deploying and supporting Apache Kafka. A technical manager is necessary.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Apache Kafka is an open-sourced solution. There are fees if you want the support, and I would recommend it for enterprises. There are annual subscriptions available.

What other advice do I have?

Apache Kafka is one of the best open-source solutions that are available today.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Apache Kafka an eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
Namrata G - PeerSpot reviewer
Independent Technology Consultant - Financial Softwares at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Easy to set up and implement but needs better security
Pros and Cons
  • "As of now, the most valuable aspects are the topic-based subscription and the fanout exchange that we are using."
  • "If you create one event in the past, you cannot resend it."

What is our primary use case?

We are generating stock calls and then those are given to various other processes.

What is most valuable?

As of now, the most valuable aspects are the topic-based subscription and the fanout exchange that we are using.

It was easy to set up and implement. 

What needs improvement?

As of now, it is satisfying all my requirements. There is nothing much that I am looking for or missing in the product. They could focus on the speed, or maybe something like error handling or resending those requests.

If you create one event in the past, you cannot resend it. You need to create it from the beginning.

They could always improve security.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've used the solution for three or four years. 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We have three teams using the solution right now. There are about ten people per team using it. We have about 30 licenses. 

It's used on a daily basis. 

How are customer service and support?

I can't speak to technical support. I've never reached out to them at all. 

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We're also familiar with RabbitMQ. If you compare PubSub Event Broker and RabbitMQ, PubSub is more reliable. RabbitMQ requires a line to be installed, and it was a bit of a tedious process to get it installed. After that, it was smooth enough. My use case, whichever I use, is satisfied. I haven't explored either very deep beyond my own use cases. 

How was the initial setup?

The solution is very easy to set up. It's straightforward. It's not overly complex or difficult.

What about the implementation team?

The implementation was set up in-house. We didn't need any integrator or consultant support. 

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I'm not aware of the exact pricing. 

What other advice do I have?

I'd recommend the solution to other users, so long as it aligns with their use case. This product is more suited to a small to medium-sized company.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. If it was faster and perhaps had some security enhancements, I would rate it higher. 

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
Buyer's Guide
Message Queue (MQ) Software
September 2022
Get our free report covering IBM, Apache, Apache, and other competitors of VMware RabbitMQ. Updated: September 2022.
634,550 professionals have used our research since 2012.