We performed a comparison between Amazon SQS and Red Hat AMQ 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."We use the tool in interface integrations."
"I am able to find out what's going on very easily."
"SQS is very stable, and it has lots of features."
"The libraries that connect and manage the queues are rich in features."
"With SQS, we can trigger events in various cloud environments. It offers numerous benefits for us."
"The solution is easy to scale and cost-effective."
"The most valuable feature of Amazon SQS is the interface."
"We use SNS as the publisher, and our procurement service subscribes to those events using SQS. In the past, we relied on time-based or batch-based processes to send data between services on-premises. With SQS, we can trigger actions based on real-time changes in business processes, improving reliability."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"AMQ is highly scalable and performs well. It can process a large volume of messages in one second. AMQ and OpenShift are a good combination."
"This product is well adopted on the OpenShift platform. For organizations like ours that use OpenShift for many of our products, this is a good feature."
"Red Hat AMQ's best feature is its reliability."
"My impression is that it is average in terms of scalability."
"The most valuable feature for us is the operator-based automation that is provided by Streams for infrastructure as well as user and topic management. This saves a lot of time and effort on our part to provide infrastructure. For example, the deployment of infrastructure is reduced from approximately a week to a day."
"The solution is very lightweight, easy to configure, simple to manage, and robust since it launched."
"The solution is not available on-premises so that rules out any customers looking for the messaging solution on-premises."
"Be cautious around pay-as-you-use licensing as costs can become expensive."
"The tool needs improvement in user-friendliness and discoverability."
"As a company that uses IBM solutions, it's difficult to compare Amazon SQS to other solutions. We have been using IBM solutions for a long time and they are very mature in integration and queuing. In my role as an integration manager, I can say that Amazon SQS is designed primarily for use within the Amazon ecosystem and does not have the same level of functionality as IBM MQ or other similar products. It has limited connectivity options and does not easily integrate with legacy systems."
"Sending or receiving messages takes some time, and it could be quicker."
"It would be easier to have a dashboard that allows us to see everything and manage everything since we have so many queues."
"There are some issues with SQS's transaction queue regarding knowing if something has been received."
"The initial setup of Amazon SQS is in the middle range of difficulty. You need to learn Amazon AWS and know how to navigate, create resources, and structures, and provide rules."
"AMQ could be better integrated with Jira and patch management tools."
"The turnaround of adopting new versions of underlying technologies sometimes is too slow."
"Red Hat AMQ's cost could be improved, and it could have better integration."
"There are several areas in this solution that need improvement, including clustering multi-nodes and message ordering."
"There are some aspects of the monitoring that could be improved on. There is a tool that is somewhat connected to Kafka called Service Registry. This is a product by Red Hat that I would like to see integrated more tightly."
"There is improvement needed to keep the support libraries updated."
"This product needs better visualization capabilities in general."
Amazon SQS is ranked 4th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 13 reviews while Red Hat AMQ is ranked 8th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 7 reviews. Amazon SQS is rated 8.2, while Red Hat AMQ is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Amazon SQS writes "Stable, useful interface, and scales well". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat AMQ writes "A stable, open-source technology, with a convenient deployment". Amazon SQS is most compared with Apache Kafka, Redis, Amazon MQ and Anypoint MQ, whereas Red Hat AMQ is most compared with Apache Kafka, ActiveMQ, IBM MQ, VMware RabbitMQ and PubSub+ Event Broker. See our Amazon SQS vs. Red Hat AMQ 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.
