We performed a comparison between ActiveMQ 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."Most people or many people recommended using ActiveMQ on small and medium-scale applications."
"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."
"It provides the best support services."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the holding and forwarding."
"The ability to store the failed events for some time is valuable."
"I'm impressed, I think that Active MQ is great."
"The initial setup is straightforward and only takes a few minutes."
"ActiveMQ is very lightweight and quick."
"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."
"Reliability is the main criterion for selecting this tool for one of the busiest airports in Mumbai."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"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."
"My impression is that it is average in terms of scalability."
"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."
"This solution could improve by providing better documentation."
"I would like the tool to improve compliance and stability. We will encounter issues while using the central applications. In the solution's future releases, I want to control and set limitations for databases."
"The UI. It's both a good thing and a bad thing. The UI is too simple. Sometimes you wanna see the messages coming to the queue, and you have to refresh the dashboard, the console of the product."
"It does not scale out well. It ends up being very complex if you have a lot of mirror queues."
"Distributed message processing would be a nice addition."
"The solution can improve the other protocols to equal the AMQ protocol they offer."
"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."
"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."
"There is improvement needed to keep the support libraries updated."
"There are several areas in this solution that need improvement, including clustering multi-nodes and message ordering."
"The turnaround of adopting new versions of underlying technologies sometimes is too slow."
"The challenge is the multiple components it has. This brings a higher complexity compared to IBM MQ, which is a single complete unit."
"Red Hat AMQ's cost could be improved, and it could have better integration."
"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."
"AMQ could be better integrated with Jira and patch management tools."
"This product needs better visualization capabilities in general."
ActiveMQ is ranked 3rd in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 24 reviews while Red Hat AMQ is ranked 8th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 8 reviews. ActiveMQ is rated 7.8, while Red Hat AMQ is rated 8.0. 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 Red Hat AMQ writes "A stable, open-source technology, with a convenient deployment". ActiveMQ is most compared with IBM MQ, Anypoint MQ, Amazon SQS, VMware Tanzu Data Services and Apache Kafka, whereas Red Hat AMQ is most compared with Apache Kafka, IBM MQ, VMware Tanzu Data Services, IBM Event Streams and Amazon MQ. See our ActiveMQ 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.
