We performed a comparison between IBM MQ and Redis 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 our routing feature when the request is coming from the business application. The request goes to the distributive side and it is routed to the right claim instance."
"The first things are its simplicity and its robustness. Compared to any other product, it's the most robust I've worked with. And it's extremely easy to manage."
"There are a lot of extensible options for security, i.e., various things you can do. It's pretty easy to navigate."
"IBM MQ's flexibility has sped up our active communication."
"It improves reliability and guarantees that messages are not lost."
"The solution is easy to use and has good performance."
"The MQ protocol is widely used across multiple applications and it's so simple for connectivity."
"It also has a backup queue concept and topics, features that I have not seen anywhere else. I like these features very much."
"Redis is better tested and is used by large companies. I haven't found a direct alternative to what Redis offers. Plus, there are a lot of support and learning resources available, which help you use Redis efficiently."
"The ability to fetch and save data quickly is valuable."
"The product offers fast access to my database."
"I use Redis mostly to cache repeated data that is required."
"It makes operations more efficient. The information processing is very fast, and very responsive. It's all about the technology."
"The most valuable features of Redis are its ease of use and speed. It does not have access to the disc and it is fast."
"The online interface is very fast and easy to use."
"Redis is a simple, powerful, and fast solution."
"It's not always easy for applications to connect to IBM MQ, but I think it's fine in general."
"I would like to see message duplication included."
"I can't say pricing is good."
"IBM MQ's pricing is higher than its competitors'."
"IBM MQ could improve by adding more protocols or APIs for a standard application, such as MuleSoft."
"The solution isn't free. There are other solutions, like RabbitMQ, which are open source and absolutely free to use. It's one reason we are moving away from IBM."
"It would be an advantage if they can include streaming in IBM MQ, similar to Kafka. Kafka is used mainly for streaming purposes. This feature is clearly lacking in IBM MQ. If they add this feature to IBM MQ, it will have an edge over other products."
"Presenting and maybe having some different options for different user experiences based on the administrative duties that you have to do as an app manager or configure the server or security would be an improvement."
"Sometimes, we use Redis as a cluster, and the clusters can sometimes suffer some issues and bring some downtime to your application."
"If we use a lot of data, it will eventually cost us a lot."
"It's actually quite expensive."
"I would prefer it if there was more information available about Redis. That would make it easier for new beginners. Currently, there is a lack of resources."
"The only thing is the lack of a GUI application. There was a time when we needed to resolve an issue in production. If we had a GUI, it would have been easier."
"The initial setup took some time as our technical team needed to familiarize themselves with Redis."
"The tool should improve by increasing its size limits and handling dynamic data better. We use the client ID or associate it with a key for static content. The solution will not be easy for a beginner. Unless you understand SQL data, it will be difficult to understand and use Redis. It also needs to be user-friendly."
"There is a lack of documentation on the scalability of the solution."
IBM MQ is ranked 2nd in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 158 reviews while Redis is ranked 7th in Database as a Service with 11 reviews. IBM MQ is rated 8.4, while Redis is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of IBM MQ writes "Offers the ability to batch metadata transfers between systems that support MQ as the communication method". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Redis writes "Enables efficient caching and helps users fetch and save data quickly". IBM MQ is most compared with ActiveMQ, Apache Kafka, VMware Tanzu Data Services, Red Hat AMQ and Avada Software Infrared360, whereas Redis is most compared with Google Cloud Memorystore, Amazon SQS, Chroma, ActiveMQ and Amazon ElastiCache. See our IBM MQ vs. Redis 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.
