IBM MQ Review

Provides us with several connection channels and name-based and user-based authentication


What is our primary use case?

We are mainly using it for communication, for connecting to multiple systems. Applications are putting their messages on MQ and, from MQ, we are reading them using IBM Integration Bus. We then process them and send back the response.

What is most valuable?

The MQ protocol is widely used across multiple applications and it's so simple for connectivity. 

Other valuable features include the 

  • messaging format
  • message persistence
  • security features, including several connection channels and name-based and user-based authentication.

What needs improvement?

I had some issues earlier, two, three years back. I don't exactly remember them now.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with IBM MQ for eight years. We are currently trying to implement IBM MQ on OpenShift and cp4i. We have MQ on-premises and we are trying to migrate it to OpenShift, a container platform.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Stability-wise, it's very good. People have been using it for 15 to 20 years. MQ and IIB are the most stable products from IBM.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We can scale up and down anytime. There are no issues there. We have 20 to 30 internal applications connecting to middleware and all of them are connecting using the MQ protocol.

How are customer service and technical support?

We haven't had major issues, but whenever we have had an issue we have written to IBM and they have gotten back to us on a timely basis.

How was the initial setup?

The setup is straightforward. There is not much to create, it's a one-time setup, including configuring the high-availability. That is the main thing. The parameters create the queues. It takes about 10 to 15 seconds for each queue.

In addition, we had IIB, the IBM Integration Bus deployment, including message flows and DB scripts, etc. So the deployment was not only MQ. In deploying IIB flows, we had some queue creation, server connections, and channel creation. Overall, it was about 80 percent IIB deployment and 20 percent MQ deployment.

We had two people involved: one guy from the support team and one guy from admin. For maintenance, in the sense of the application support, we have four team members but we are handling multiple applications, not only MQ.

What about the implementation team?

We deployed it ourselves.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Although I'm not involved with costs in our company, IBM products, in general, have high licensing costs and support costs are too high. A lot of people have started using open-source, like Kubernetes and microservices. There is also Apache ActiveMQ. There are many other products out there.

What other advice do I have?

I would tell people to use this, except that the pricing and support costs are too high.

I would rate MQ at eight out of 10. 

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
**Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
More IBM MQ reviews from users
...who work at a Financial Services Firm
...who compared it with Apache Kafka
Add a Comment
Guest