It's predominantly for message queuing, to assure delivery.
Our team manages messaging aspects with this product, among others.
It's predominantly for message queuing, to assure delivery.
Our team manages messaging aspects with this product, among others.
I like the architecture it provides seamlessly for assured delivery.
The monitoring could be even better by building it into the product. The disaster recovery mechanism could also be built-in.
I would like to see them not rely on third-party tools for everything.
Finally, they have provided a Liberty Profile in the Web Console for administration, and that could be further enhanced. It is not fit for use by an enterprise. They have to get rid of their WebSphere process and develop a front-end on Node.js or the like.
I have been working with IBM MQ for almost seven years.
It is stable, for sure.
We are facing some issues with the scalability in some of the components. That can be improved.
We are satisfied with the technical support.
The initial setup is straightforward. It takes a few minutes.
We started with IBM but we have recently been looking at Kafka and Solace.
If you have mission-critical applications that rely on an exchange of data, and the data is very valuable, then I would suggest using MQ.
We have a team of people of 50 to 60 people using it, in middleware admin.