Over 253,234 professionals have used IT Central Station research.
Compare the best Message Queue vendors based on product reviews, ratings, and comparisons.
All reviews and ratings are from real users, validated by our triple authentication process.
The total ranking of a product, represented by the bar length, is based on a weighted aggregate
score. For Views, Comparisons, Reviews, and Followers the score is calculated as follows: The
product with the highest count in each area gets the highest available score of 17.5 points.
Every other product gets assigned points based on its total in proportion to the #1 product in
that area. For example, if a product has 80% of the number of reviews compared to the product
with the most reviews then the product's score for reviews would be 17.5% (weighting factor) *
80% = 14. For Average Rating, the maximum score is 30 points awarded linearly based on our
rating scale of 1-10. If a product has fewer than ten reviews, the point contribution
for Average Rating is reduced (one-third reduction in points for products with 5-9 reviews;
two-thirds reduction for products with fewer than five reviews). Reviews that are more than 24 months old,
as well as those written by resellers, are completely excluded from the ranking algorithm.
A Message Queue refers to a list or series of actionable work objects waiting to be dealt with by an agreed-upon IT process. The Message piece is data transported between a sending and a receiver application. There is a logical, sequential order of byte arrays with headers. Message Queues might contain information for one system to begin processing a certain task or may alert the system about a plain message or a finished task.
The basic architecture begins with producers, which create these messages and then deliver them to the resulting message queue. The messages are then stored for the consumer until the Message Queue is retrieved. Easy functionality is key for IT experts as there are usually priorities, so not having to immediately act on a message creates a bit of a buffer when managing many buckets at a time.
Message Queues are part of an everyday enterprise and do not always require an immediate response. Some Message Queues are known as an asynchronous communications protocol, (ACP) which, by definition is waiting for response based on the receiver. The best example of asynchronous messaging is email.
When the email is sent, the sender is able to process all other work without having to receive an immediate response from the receiver, decoupling the producer of the data to the consumer. No interaction is required with the Message Queue by both participants at the same time. A Message Queue makes it possible to keep processes in an application separate and independent.
The best Message Queue systems are extremely user-friendly, easy to scale and easy to maintain. An IT department is often mobile and able to access the message on premises or with mobile tools. This lends itself to flexibility and maximizes productivity.
Message Queue Reviews
Read reviews of Message Queue that are trending in the IT Central Station community:
Your trust is our top concern, so companies can't alter or remove reviews.
We use it in a number of our applications for message queuing. As a broker dealer, it gives us the ability to queue things up and to send them out at a different time; and it works really well. We go to different reports, and get options and... more»
It gives us flexibility when it comes to offering different projects or different types of solutions to customers. Instead of somebody having to sit back and wait for something, we give them the option now to be able to say, "Hey, we can give... more»
It's probably more like everything else. We're running into this world where everything – MQ, mainframe – is looked at as legacy. I know that it's not, but if it could be a little more GUI-based; if it could be a little bit easier to manage.... more»
What I like about IBM MQ is that the ability to add applications to it is quite simple. There are a lot of extensible options for security, i.e., various things you can do. It's pretty easy to navigate. It's pretty easy to install and use... more»
It allows more people to be able to support the application. They have training and we get folks to actually go in and bounce services and update services through IBM MQ because it is graphical. It's fairly intuitive on what's there. It... more»
I think one of the things to improve on could be more administrative profiles which might simplify the experience. IBM MQ has a lot of settings. We're only using probably a fraction, maybe 10%, of the overall settings. Working for a large... more»
For us, the most valuable feature is the fact that we can move data from disparate systems quite easily. It's not a mountain of data for us, because of the nature of our business, but it's critical that we move information through the queues,... more»
It makes it much easier to have people from different experience levels be able to interface with one another, without having to be cross-trained on many different platforms. A business benefit is, it can take somebody who's a Windows guy or... more»
For our internal systems and connecting things together, it works really well. If we're trying to connect to something in the web or other things, we don't use it, because we feel that REST or other APIs are more easily adaptable to that... more»
Kafka, as compared with other messaging system options, is great for large scale message processing applications. It offers high throughput with built-in fault-tolerance and replication. Messaging systems in general allow for logical and... more»
I used Kafka with a client to decouple applications with different availability profiles. Before using a messaging-based architecture with Kafka as the messaging system, the client used a coordinator application to fire off various posts to... more»
Kafka requires non-trivial expertise with DevOps to deploy in production at scale. The organization needs to understand ZooKeeper and Kafka and should consider using additional tools, such as MirrorMaker, so that the organization can survive... more»
The most valuable feature is the fact that it's guaranteed delivery; it's conversational. A lot of our transactions are basically transactions back and forth between either rewards members, reservations and even between our databases. MQ... more»
We're an IBM mainframe user. It folds into our hardware very well. Our support is covered that way. It's kind of an end-to-end type solution. It works well with the distributed partners. We use WebSphere, so we can go ahead, plug things in... more»
They might be able to improve the monitoring features. When you're looking at distributed platforms, you're looking at different breakpoints to it. MQ has a good support structure, but it would be nice if they could kind of fold MQ into other... more»
For me, the most important features are its interfaces with RACF and how we can set up the security to allow and disallow who can get to it, who can use it; and then what MQ gets to do on the mainframe and what it does not get to do, basically.
Our organization uses it a lot to interface applications that are outside the mainframe with applications on the mainframe, or to CICS, items like that. It helps meet that threshold between what do the application people want to do – because... more»
Sometimes the applications people don't really understand MQ. For example, we had somebody set up a call through MQ and they ended up making dozens and dozens of calls when they only really only needed to do one. They don't understand how MQ... more»
It's fairly easy to set up and configure. It's very effective as far as what we need to do with the type of processing that we're trying to get done, message-based processing. It is easily replicate-able. We have tons of servers that actually... more»
In conjunction with some other products we use, such as IIB, it does a lot of the transformation. It cuts out a lot of programming that has to be done for transforming data from our carrier customers into the format that we need it to be.... more»
There is room for improvement with the price. It's actually not really one of the high-priced items, but everything's relative. I'm not really sure that there's a lot that we could really think of that we would need above and beyond where we... more»
Integration is a key benefit; it integrates easily. Management is easy. Queue management is one of the key features of it; how easy it is to get set up, get started, get running, look at your queues, look at your workloads, etc., and see... more»
Everything that we need so far works, so I think I'd have to look at the road map, what we planned for internet of things and see if it meets that, which it should. At that point, we'll have a better understanding of what we need going... more»
It's incredibly flexible. It's not software that people get into a religion over; where it’s mainframe or distributed. MQ runs; you don't have to worry about what platform it's on. I find that to be very, very useful. It recovers extremely... more»
The very mainframe-centric zIIP offload is very critical to me. I appreciate any and all work IBM can do to offload work onto a zIIP engine to reduce my operating costs. I always tell every vendor that answer. It doesn't make a difference if... more»
It's ability to scale, it's ability to do guaranteed delivery and it's ability to do point-to-point of what we subscribe are the most valuable features. And finally, it's ability to handle messages in various formats and structures.
The benefit would be scale. Because of the way it works, you can really have many, many users who use the solution at the same time. Other benefits would be the ability to send messages between systems and do systems integration, without... more»
I would like the ability to connect with some of the more recent offerings, such as API Connect; being able to publish our MQ endpoints, the queues, the messaging infrastructure as IT assets. To control them, govern them and manage them and... more»
I inherited it when I took over administration of a platform. It is pretty core in our business. I haven't really dealt with configuration that much. It is used to push transactions throughout z/OS, IBM i, Windows, and Linux. It seems to be... more»
I didn't know how to get into it. I had to Google how to get into it. Once I got into it, it made sense. It was a green-screen implementation, but it made sense. I don't know enough about it to really say, "This is where it's missing... more»
Scalability and guaranteed delivery are the most valuable features. It's pretty straightforward to scale out. We use MQ to back our enterprise service bus. Guaranteed delivery is very important for most of the data that we send. Having a... more»
My organization has used MQ for a long time. It is a very scalable, common platform that we can use for sending messages. We use MQ in terms of messaging, MQTT, and MQ FTE for file transfers. It's versatile; it's very functional; and it... more»
The product itself is not difficult to use. I guess you could always ask for a little bit better GUI admin console. All in all, it's not hard to use. In a large organization like ours, sometimes we have a large MQ installation base; lots of... more»
The thing that I like about MQ most is its reliability. It's one of those types of products that just works. You don't have to tinker around with it too much. One of the biggest things that I really look for in a product is from a reliability... more»
It allows us to do point-to-point integration in an easy manner. It allows different applications to talk to each other; applications that may speak different languages. You have mainframe technologies, Java-based apps, .NET, things of that... more»
I would just like a more user-friendly experience to do common administration tasks. I know that you can use MQ Explorer, but having something that's already built in would definitely be useful. We haven't necessarily experienced any issues... more»
So far, it's helped us with our Maximo integration between the users and the database administrators. I know we kind of lagged behind on some updates, which caused us problems. We recently upgraded, which had made things a lot easier, got rid... more»
It helped us with some of our security, on some of our roles, if I remember correctly. It helped us integrating; we’re trying to move a bunch of different things, like trying to move EZMaxMobile into our Maximo and a few other things. Part of... more»
Off the top of my head, I can't really think of any features I’d like to see in future versions. Right now, I don’t have any improvements to the version we’re using. We just upgraded two or three months ago, and we're still getting it all set... more»
The most valuable feature of RabbitMQ is the ability to set up workflows simply with configuration. We had some very complex problems (logging, auditing, sequential and parallel operations) that have been easily solved by inserting a queue in... more»
Our software has evolved dramatically over the past 18 months of development. Major modifications to business logic have been handled easily. This is because each operation that the software performs has been atomic. That was then wired up... more»
* RabbitMQ is great, but it depends on the Erlang VM. * I understand that Erlang is the reason why RabbitMQ is what it is. However, having to install and maintain yet another VM product has been annoying. * The configuration for RabbitMQ... more»
I've used other solutions, but the most valuable features of this solution are the search capabilities, consolidating the data and searching through the data. I think that these are some of the key things.
For this organization, it was the first log management solution. So, it definitely gave us the ability to search through the data when we had events. We could search based on the identity of the person, or the machine, or the IP address. We... more»
I want to see a three-dimensional perspective to the data. I don't want to see just an event perspective to the data. I want to be able to identify a user and within clicks, know the whole activity of the user. I don't want to see it in... more»
It's wonderful and is our primary backbone for moving data across different applications, within our company. Especially when we're talking about the healthcare and pharmacy industries, where we have patients' critical data, this is what we... more»
It has definitely brought a lot of benefit into our organization, especial when you talk about applications talking to each other. For example, when you look at a patient's experience, i.e., from the moment the patient comes in, sees the... more»
One of the features to pinpoint is migration. When we want to migrate from one version to another, it takes years. So, definitely, we want to see some solution for IBM's standpoint, in order to make it easy for the customers to migrate from... more»
The major thing we like about it is zero transaction loss. The other thing, which is a plus point, is first in, first out (FIFO). You can be pretty sure that if MQ goes down for whatever reason, the transactions will still sustain; they won't... more»
There is a good user interface. It is a very good way of interfacing two systems. For example, in our case, the central bank clearing systems interface our systems using MQ. It is seamless. I did not face any problems. Initially, when you do... more»
It should be able to keep a copy, so that if there is an accident, we would still be able to record the transactions. Maybe processing could be faster, in terms of EPS. If you consider migration from one version to another, that is an issue... more»
Apache Kafka is actually a distributed commit log. That is different than most messaging and queuing systems before it. I find the ability to write data at one velocity and have subscribing consumers read at different velocities to be the... more»
Kafka has a guaranteed delivery mechanism that is very easy to set up. When starting out with minimal hardware, it can handle very large data volumes. When prototyping and creating a proof of concept, Kafka has helped to speed up the timeline... more»
Integration with my vendor product is the most valuable feature. The vendor strongly prefers MQ. We had a lot of configuration issues when we tried other products. The second-most valuable feature is the stability.
With the tooling around being able to see what's in the queue, we found third-party products to be friendlier than the out-of-the-box products, as far as, "Let me see what the content is of the object that's on the queue." I want to actually... more»