We performed a comparison between ActiveMQ and VMware RabbitMQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Message broadcasting: There could be a use case sending the same message to all consumers. So as a producer, I broadcast the message to a topic. Then, whichever consumers are subscribed to the topic can consume the same message."
"It’s a JMS broker, so the fact that it can allow for asynchronous communication is valuable."
"The initial setup is straightforward and only takes a few minutes."
"The ability to store the failed events for some time is valuable."
"ActiveMQ is very lightweight and quick."
"Reliable message delivery and mirroring."
"ActiveMQ brings the most value to small applications because it will not cost you very much to complete."
"I am impressed with the tool’s latency. Also, the messages in ActiveMQ wait in a queue. The messages will start to move when the system reopens after getting stuck."
"After creating a RabbitMQ service, they provide you with a sort of web management dashboard."
"The solution's best feature is its exceptional speed, delivering efficient utilization of resources."
"Companies can scale the solution, so long as they have server room."
"I like the high throughput of 20K messages/sec, and that it supports multiple protocols."
"The security is great."
"Some of the most valuable features are publish and subscribe, fanout, and queues."
"The most valuable feature is asynchronous calls, which are easy to configure."
"The message routing is the most valuable feature. It is effective and flexible."
"The clustering for sure needs improvement. When we were using it, the only thing available was an active/passive relationship that had to be maintained via shared file storage. That model includes a single point of failure in that storage medium."
"One potential area would be the complexity of the initial setup."
"I would rate the stability a five out of ten because sometimes it gets stuck, and we have to restart it. We"
"The solution's stability needs improvement."
"Needs to focus on a certain facet and be good at it, instead of handling support for most of the available message brokers."
"Message Management: Better management of the messages. Perhaps persist them, or put in another queue with another life cycle."
"It would be great if it is included as part of the solution, as Kafka is doing. Even though the use case of Kafka is different, If something like data extraction is possible, or if we can experiment with partition tolerance and other such things, that will be great."
"From the TPS point of view, it's like 100,000 transactions that need to be admitted from different devices and also from the different minor small systems. Those are best fit for Kafka. We have used it on the customer side, and we thought of giving a try to ActiveMQ, but we have to do a lot of performance tests and approval is required before we can use it for this scale."
"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 support feature could benefit from some improvement in terms of accessibility and responsiveness."
"VMware RabbitMQ needs to create a new queue system."
"The product has to improve the crisis management, especially in memory issues."
"If you're outside IP address range, the clustering no longer has all the features which is problematic."
"We needed to configure additional plugins. While it was relatively easy to do this on-premises, it became more challenging in the cloud."
"There are some security concerns that have been raised with this product."
"I’d like this dashboard to use web sockets, so it would actually be in real time. It would slightly increase debugging, etc."
ActiveMQ is ranked 3rd in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 24 reviews while VMware RabbitMQ is ranked 5th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 40 reviews. ActiveMQ is rated 7.8, while VMware RabbitMQ is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of ActiveMQ writes "Allows for asynchronous communication, enabling services to operate independently but issues with stability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware RabbitMQ writes "Reliable queueing functionality and versatile tool that can be used with any programming languages ". ActiveMQ is most compared with IBM MQ, Anypoint MQ, Red Hat AMQ, Amazon SQS and Apache Kafka, whereas VMware RabbitMQ is most compared with IBM MQ, Apache Kafka, Anypoint MQ, Red Hat AMQ and PubSub+ Event Broker. See our ActiveMQ vs. VMware RabbitMQ report.
See our list of best Message Queue (MQ) Software vendors.
We monitor all Message Queue (MQ) Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
