We performed a comparison between PubSub+ Event Broker 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've built a lot of products into it and it's been quite easy to feed market data onto the systems and put entitlements and controls around that. That was a big win for us when we were consolidating our platforms down. Trying to have one event bus, one messaging bus, for the whole globe, and consolidate everything over time, has been key for us. We've been able to do that through one API, even if it's across the different languages."
"We like the seamless flexibility in protocol exchange offering without writing a code."
"The event portal and the diversity of deployment options in a hybrid landscape are the most valuable features."
"One of the main reasons for using PubSub+ is that it is a proper event manager that can handle events in a reactive way."
"The way we can replicate information and send it to several subscribers is most valuable. It can be used for any kind of business where you've got multiple users who need information. Any company, such as LinkedIn, with a huge number of subscribers and any business, such as publishing, supermarket, airline, or shipping can use it."
"Going from something where we had outages and capacity issues constantly to a system that was able to scale with the massive market data and messaging spikes that happened during the initial stages of the COVID crisis in March, we were able to scale with 40 plus percent growth in our platform over the course of days."
"As of now, the most valuable aspects are the topic-based subscription and the fanout exchange that we are using."
"The topic hierarchy is pretty flexible. Once you have the subject defined just about anybody who knows Java can come onboard. The APIs are all there."
"Red Hat AMQ's best feature is its reliability."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"The solution is very lightweight, easy to configure, simple to manage, and robust since it launched."
"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."
"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."
"If you create one event in the past, you cannot resend it."
"The ease of management could be approved. The GUI is very good, but to configure and manage these devices programmatically in the software version is not easy. For example, if I would like to spin up a new software broker, then I could in theory use the API, but it would require a considerable amount of development effort to do so. There should be a tool, or something that Solace supports, that we could use for this, e.g., a platform like Terraform where we could use infrastructure as code to configure our source appliances."
"The deployment process is complex."
"It could be cheaper. It could also have easier usage. It is a brilliant product, but it is quite complex to use."
"Some of the feature's gaps with some of the open-source vendors have been closed in a lot of ways. Being more agile and addressing those earlier could be an area for improvement."
"The integrations could improve in PubSub+ Event Broker."
"The section on observability pertains to understanding the functioning of an event crash. Instead of focusing on how the crash occurs, attention is given to the observable aspects, such as a memory pipeline where one person pushes messages and another reads them. However, this pipeline often encounters issues, such as the reader being unavailable, causing the system to become stuck and preventing the messages from moving forward. This can lead to the pipeline being permanently stalled."
"The licensing and the cost are the major pitfalls."
"There is improvement needed to keep the support libraries updated."
"Red Hat AMQ's cost could be improved, and it could have better integration."
"The turnaround of adopting new versions of underlying technologies sometimes is too slow."
"This product needs better visualization capabilities in general."
"AMQ could be better integrated with Jira and patch management tools."
"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."
PubSub+ Event Broker is ranked 6th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 15 reviews while Red Hat AMQ is ranked 8th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 7 reviews. PubSub+ Event Broker is rated 8.6, while Red Hat AMQ is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of PubSub+ Event Broker writes "Event life cycle management changes the way a designer or architect will design a topic and discover what is available". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat AMQ writes "A stable, open-source technology, with a convenient deployment". PubSub+ Event Broker is most compared with Apache Kafka, IBM MQ, ActiveMQ and VMware RabbitMQ, whereas Red Hat AMQ is most compared with Apache Kafka, ActiveMQ, IBM MQ and VMware RabbitMQ. See our PubSub+ Event Broker 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.