We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why

VMware RabbitMQ OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

VMware RabbitMQ is #4 ranked solution in top Message Queue Software. PeerSpot users give VMware RabbitMQ an average rating of 8 out of 10. VMware RabbitMQ is most commonly compared to IBM MQ: VMware RabbitMQ vs IBM MQ. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a computer software company, accounting for 28% of all views.
What is VMware RabbitMQ?
  • RabbitMQ is the most popular open source message broker, with more than 35,000 production deployments world-wide. RabbitMQ is lightweight and easy to deploy on premises and in the cloud and runs on all major operating systems. It supports most developer platforms, multiple messaging protocols and can be deployed in distributed and federated configurations to meet high-scale, high-availability requirements.

VMware RabbitMQ was previously known as RabbitMQ by Pivotal, Rabbit, RabbitMQ.

VMware RabbitMQ Buyer's Guide

Download the VMware RabbitMQ Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: January 2022

VMware RabbitMQ Video

VMware RabbitMQ Pricing Advice

What users are saying about VMware RabbitMQ pricing:
"are using the open-source version, which can be used free of cost."

VMware RabbitMQ Reviews

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
Assistant Student at a retailer with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
A good tool that's simple to use and is great for messaging
Pros and Cons
  • "Companies can scale the solution, so long as they have server room."
  • "The user interface could be improved."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use the solution for consumers and publishers. It's for messaging and consumer publishing. That's it.

What is most valuable?

The solution is simple to use.

It's great for messaging and consumer publishing.

Companies can scale the solution, so long as they have server room.

The stability is good.

What needs improvement?

The user interface could be improved. We have an interface that shows the consumption rate, the number of consumers, their occupation rate. We should have a column in that interface that shows the estimated time until, at the current rate of consumption, the number of messages is to be consumed from a specific queue. That would be great. I wanted to read, however, as it is right now, JavaScript would have loaded the browser too much. Basically, I'd just like to see the consumption rate in each queue without too much fuss.

The solution could use some plugins that could be integrated into the server installation. We had a plugin that we used to delay something that from one version to the other was integrated into the server setup. Maybe it was more of an extension. However, more plugins could be also be integrated into newer versions of Rabbit.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've used the solution since 2013 or 2014. It's been about eight years at this point. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is usually stable. We have problems with space on the Rabbit servers. When they are full, we might lose everything. That's a big no-no. This is a problem for Kafka as well, however, we have higher thresholds in that area. Rabbit is the poor brother to Kafka, so it receives less space. That's why, sometimes, in some departments, this problem occurs.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution can scale, however, we use a lot of space for Kafka. We have clusters through the servers, and there may be more for each department. If some needs appear, we can increase the number of servers in a cluster to better manage messages. As long as your company can increase the number of servers, it can scale. 

We have about 100 departments that use this solution in some way.

In our case, we have in our department five people and we have two clusters with Rabbit for two different directions. For us, it's enough. We do not plan to increase usage.

How are customer service and support?

I've never directly contacted technical support. We use recommendations on the site, which is very good. I appreciate the recommendations, however, I'm not sure about the maintenance of the documentation from one version of Rabbit to the other. The older versions of the documentation might be less accurate.

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

Other departments might use, for example, Kafka, however, I'm unsure as I have no visibility on them.

How was the initial setup?

I was there when the solution was initially implemented and, from what I recall, it took half a year. 

It was completely new. No one knew anything about it. However, we knew that we had to do something to improve the communication between departments. It was a good solution. That said, it took a long time before everyone understood how it works.

We had a few dedicated people who liked the idea of Rabbit and implemented it. It took a while for the rest of the company to get behind them and learn how to do it.

There are one or two people at any given time available to handle any type of maintenance responsibilities.

What about the implementation team?

We handled the implementation process ourselves. 

What other advice do I have?

We're using a few different versions. It depends on the department. Some departments have the latest, some don't, some use a very old version. I'm using 3.8. We do have plans to make an upgrade. 

It was a few years ago now when I learned this process of separating publishers versus consumers in terms of messages and communicating between departments. This was the biggest game changer for myself. I'd advise new users study that aspect and understand it.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. It's a very good tool and we use it all the time.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
Michael Twisdale
CTO, CIO, Chief Architect at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Real User
Top 20
Beneficial features, simple install, highly scalable, and simple "pub/sub" model.
Pros and Cons
  • "Some of the most valuable features are publish and subscribe, fanout, and queues."
  • "They should improve on the ability to scale your queues in a very simple and elegant way with the same power that they have would be great."

What is our primary use case?

We use the solution on our SaaS platform to speedup and simplify customer access across services.

What is most valuable?

Some of the most valuable features are “publish and subscribe”, fanout queueing, and scalability.

We have a number of different use cases in our scenario. A key one is “publish and subscribe”. We have spent the last year breaking up a large monolithic application into microservices and each microservice has to subscribe to different events for the purpose of CQRS and other kinds of updates. RabbitMQ is perfect for “publish and subscribe”. It does an awesome job at fanout, perfect for CQRS, messages are delivered to all subscribers with almost no additional latency.


What needs improvement?

RabbitMQ provides the ability to scale queues in a very simple and elegant way. If it had a “failure queue” with robust delivery and recovery built-in with the same power, that would be great. We use a completely different queuing system for failures. So there is a little more effort to take messages in a failure queue, analyze them, figure out what went wrong and then restart them in Rabbit. It is doable, and we do it, but if we had a round trip solution in Rabbit, that would be awesome.

For me, having a robust failure queue, is high on the list of improvements needed in the near future. This is an important update needed because right now we are using Doctrine for our failure queue. Doctrine does a great job.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using the solution in the past year.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Rabbit is a very scalable solution. We could easily queue 50,000 messages in less than a minute. The first day we introduced Rabbit to replace another queueing system that we were using, there was disbelief on the part of the product team because the response was so fast. We need tens of thousands of messages queued in a short period of time, approximately one minute. For example, one user action could spawn 65,000 messages. We also need the ability to segregate different queues. This solution did a great job.

How was the initial setup?

The installation is very simple and elegant, and we love the graphics. It lets us see exactly what is happening with the ability to start the queue, stop the queue, consume messages on the queue. This is a huge help.

What about the implementation team?


We design, develop and deploy the solution ourselves.


Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We are also evaluating Apache Kafka. Our process is very disciplined. We look at the analytics, the abstraction, the architecture relative to our technical architecture, we ask ourselves questions about the use case, which is better for use A or B. Kafka is not as simple for “publish and subscribe”. You can do it, but not the best fit for us. However as a queueing system, Kafka is great. The records are stored on the queue in the order they are received, However, you can easily search by topic no matter how large the list. Important if you keep track of everything.


What other advice do I have?

There are many different use cases for each technology, as well as many approaches. So have the architecture team graph and document every solution. Have a few training days to clarify the goal, the solution and the implementation. One of the things we do in our training is to actually create prototypes, the abstract model of our ideal state. This demonstrates exactly what we all need to do. Developers understand more quickly with a model. It flattens their learning curve and they are more productive more quickly.

I rate VMware RabbitMQ a ten out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Hybrid Cloud
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Learn what your peers think about VMware RabbitMQ. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: January 2022.
564,599 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Sr Technical Consultant at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Can be a very fast message broker. Great stability, built-in admin tools and plugin architecture
Pros and Cons
  • "It can be configured to be a very fast message broker. I like the stability, the built-in admin tools and plugin architecture."
  • "If you're outside IP address range, the clustering no longer has all the features which is problematic."

What is our primary use case?

We use this product for general purpose messaging in cloud-based environments and as an implementation to MTP spec. We are customers of VMware and I'm a senior technical consultant.

How has it helped my organization?

One of the key benefits for us has been the ability to use this solution for microservice architecture communications because it provides great flexibility. One of our clients was able to push messages from the source which were replicated and forwarded to all the other brokers nationwide. Everyone who needed it, received it, and it's very cost-effective. 

What is most valuable?

The high availability and not having to replicate is valuable as is the message consumer. It can be configured depending on the use case to be a very fast message broker. I like the stability, the built-in admin tools and the plugin architecture. One of the things that makes it unique is that all of the components for messaging can be created programmatically, meaning you can have services or applications that get spun up or have auto incrementing instances. If you're in an elastic environment, you don't have to pre-configure the messaging system and the keys don't have to be known ahead of time. 

What needs improvement?

One of the issues is that as soon as you go outside of a switch or not in IP address range, the clustering no longer has all the wonderful features so clustering outside of network boundaries is a problem. I'd like to see stream processing as an additional feature. Kafka has a streaming API and I'd like Rabbit to have that too.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using this solution for nine years. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

This solution is very stable, no problems there. 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

This solution is very scalable and the number of users really depends on the organization. 

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support is good, very good. But because the underlying implementation technology is Erlang, sometimes the technical problems are at that level, in which case there's one major technical solution provider called Erlang Solutions. They're okay but if the problem goes past the product level and into the technology level, then there can be a delay in getting support because you're dealing with two companies and two technical support services. 

How was the initial setup?

These days the initial setup is moderately complex because it uses a technology that is worldwide, Erlang, which is obscure. You have to install Erlang first and that is moderately difficult. Deployment takes about a day. 

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

They use a credit based system for licensingwhere you purchase credits. People don't like it.

What other advice do I have?

My advice would be to have the messaging topology mapped out before you deploy to make the process from installation to a functioning solution more efficient. If you start looking at the topology from the revenue perspective, it usually ends up with more iterations to implement the correct topology, whereas if you start off mapping and then install, it's a more efficient way to go about it. 

I rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
TomaszSobota
Java Programmer at Netcompany
Real User
Top 20
Has the ability to utilize plugins to view the performance of the whole service on one network
Pros and Cons
  • "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."
  • "I was struggling with installing a few things. It would be good if was somewhat similar to RedHat. There should be more documentation regarding installation troubleshooting."

What is our primary use case?

I primarily use the solution for research purposes. I've utilized it for my academic studies for comparing HTTPS protocols. RabbitMQ supported the protocols I needed and I've read also that it's one of the most commonly used broker services.

What is most valuable?

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. It's wonderful. I really like it.

What needs improvement?

I was struggling with installing a few things. It would be good if was somewhat similar to RedHat. There should be more documentation regarding installation troubleshooting.

It's pretty straightforward, the setup, but it would be useful to know what to do if you do face certain challenges. Right now, without more in-depth documentation, it's unclear.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution for about one or two months. It's rather new to me.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is very stable, from what I've witnessed so far. It's also a very fast system.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I haven't scaled the solution myself, so I can't speak from personal experience. I have heard that the solution is not so simple to scale because there is a core node beside the solution. There's some sort of smoothing methodology when it comes to the messaging, so I assume it's not so simple.

How are customer service and technical support?

I've never contacted technical support for assistance.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was simple. The first time I installed it, I installed it on Windows. For me, it took about one hour. If a user was facing a few problems, I'd say it could take up to two hours. Typically it's pretty quick to set up because the recommendations are pretty good.

What about the implementation team?

I handled the initial setup myself.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I was considering using ActiveMQ on AWS, but after some research, I decided RabbitMO was a more complex solution and one that is more commonly used, so I chose RabbitMQ over it.

What other advice do I have?

I'm only really using the solution for the purposes of research. I've just installed and am working on the latest version. My interest in the solution is purely academic, so I can't speak to how it would function within an organization.

I'd definitely recommend the solution, especially over HTTP in the Nico services platform. I've done my research and have discovered it's two times faster and more commonly used. It's also really easy to use on the Nico services platform because all of the components are in the cloud.

I'd rate the solution 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.
David-B
Chief Executive Officer at Couragium Solutions
Real User
Top 20
Customizable and stable, but it is difficult to use for complex tasks
Pros and Cons
  • "The most valuable feature is that it's really customizable."
  • "When you have complex tasks, RabbitMQ is hard to use."

What is our primary use case?

We use RabbitMQ for tasks that need to communicate in real-time. I have used it as a microservices message broker.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is that it's really customizable.

When you have simple tasks, it is easy to use.

What needs improvement?

When you have complex tasks, RabbitMQ is hard to use.

There are several things that you have to do manually, so there should be better tools for that.

For how long have I used the solution?

I began working with RabbitMQ several years ago.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I have had no issues with stability. It has been perfect.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Scalability is not a problem.

How are customer service and technical support?

Because we are using the open-source version, we do not use technical support and have been solving problems on our own.

How was the initial setup?

The complexity of the setup depends on the scope of the implementation. For a single node, the initial setup is very easy. On the other hand, for setting up RabbitMQ with a cluster, you really have to know what you're doing.

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

We are using the open-source version, which can be used free of cost.

What other advice do I have?

My advice for anybody who is implementing this product is to learn the concept of message queuing and study the AMQP 0-9-1 protocol. If you study this then you won't have any problem learning the system and working with it.

In summary, this is a good product that I will continue to use, and I recommend it.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Jack Angoe
CEO at INTERFACE FINANCIAL TECHNOLOGIES LTD
Real User
Top 20
Fairly secured, quite robust, and stable but their support is lacking
Pros and Cons
  • "The security is great."
  • "Their implementation is quite tricky. It's not that easy to implement RabbitMQ as a cluster."

What is most valuable?

The security is great. The interface is nothing special. The support hasn't been that great. You need to go online yourself, to the developer community for support. But apart from that, I think it's fairly secured, quite robust, and stable so far.

What needs improvement?

Their implementation is quite tricky. It's not that easy to implement RabbitMQ as a cluster. It would be great if they could improve that. 

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using RabbitMQ for three years. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It's quite stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is very scalable. I have a team of 10 developers who are using it and I have some of our clients using it in our Cloud cluster. We have about 10 banks running on the platform now.

How are customer service and technical support?

I would rate their support as a five out of ten. It has room for major improvement. 

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is quite straightforward. It can be done within a few hours. 

What other advice do I have?

I would recommend it, but I think there should be a proof of concept for the developer team to get their hands around it and have full control of it before they go into production.

I would rate RabbitMQ a seven out of ten. 

In the next release, I would like for them to improve the UI.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Hybrid Cloud
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.