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."I am able to find out what's going on very easily."
"It is stable and scalable."
"There is no setup just some easy configuration required."
"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 solution is easy to scale and cost-effective."
"I appreciate that Amazon SQS is fully integrated with Amazon and can be accessed through normal functions or serverless functions, making it very user-friendly. Additionally, the features are comparable to those of other solutions."
"One of the useful features is the ability to schedule a call after a certain number of messages accumulate in the container. For example, if there are ten messages in the container, you can perform a specific action."
"We use the tool in interface integrations."
"The solution is very lightweight, easy to configure, simple to manage, and robust since it launched."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"Reliability is the main criterion for selecting this tool for one of the busiest airports in Mumbai."
"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 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."
"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."
"Red Hat AMQ's best feature is its reliability."
"I do not think that this solution is easy to use and the documentation of this solution has a lot of problems and can be improved in the next release. Most of the time, the images in the document are from older versions."
"Support could be improved."
"The tool needs improvement in user-friendliness and discoverability."
"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."
"The solution is not available on-premises so that rules out any customers looking for the messaging solution on-premises."
"Sometimes, we have to switch to another component similar to SQS because the patching tool for SQS is relatively slow for us."
"Be cautious around pay-as-you-use licensing as costs can become expensive."
"There is improvement needed to keep the support libraries updated."
"AMQ could be better integrated with Jira and patch management tools."
"Red Hat AMQ's cost could be improved, and it could have better integration."
"The challenge is the multiple components it has. This brings a higher complexity compared to IBM MQ, which is a single complete unit."
"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 are several areas in this solution that need improvement, including clustering multi-nodes and message ordering."
"This product needs better visualization capabilities in general."
"The turnaround of adopting new versions of underlying technologies sometimes is too slow."
Amazon SQS is ranked 5th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 13 reviews while Red Hat AMQ is ranked 8th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 8 reviews. Amazon SQS is rated 8.2, while Red Hat AMQ is rated 8.0. 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 Redis, Apache Kafka, Amazon MQ, Anypoint MQ and VMware Tanzu Data Services, whereas Red Hat AMQ is most compared with Apache Kafka, ActiveMQ, IBM MQ, VMware Tanzu Data Services 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.
