RabbitMQ Review

One crucial feature was guaranteed messaging. There are idiosyncrasies in the Windows version.

What is our primary use case?

Asynchronous messaging; supporting data integrations between multiple applications on behalf of our many customers. RabbitMQ allows us to elegantly fan-out data to a variable number of subscribers, with almost zero effort.

How has it helped my organization?

We have been able to set up a messaging system that facilitates data integration between the software modules that we sell.

RabbitMQ allowed us to do this quickly so that we could focus on the business requirements, rather than divert our efforts to message broker implementations.

Once the architecture was proven, we were able to return to the RabbitMQ message layer in order to implement an HA cluster with a minimum of problems encountered.

Our business now has a fit-for-purpose information hub that we can apply across our systems. As the customer-base grows, we know that the hub can grow with it.

What is most valuable?

RabbitMQ is a solid, widely-used messaging system with a low cost-of-ownership. It is open, but with commercial support potentially available from Pivotal if required. (We have never needed it.) There is also a strong online user community.

One crucial feature was guaranteed messaging. We needed a solution that we could trust to not lose data.

Its built-in clustering capability allowed us to configure it as a highly available message broker, so that we can have confidence in the resilience of our architecture.

It can be scaled as well, although we have not tested this.

After almost two years' usage in our production environment, I am impressed by how stable the platform is - even when running on Windows Server 2012. Sure, we have had to tweak our set-up here and there as we have learned a few operational lessons along the way but overall it is very good.

What needs improvement?

RabbitMQ is clearly better supported on Linux than it is on Windows. There are idiosyncrasies in the Windows version that are not there on Linux.

The documentation for the Windows version is also less plentiful and less accurate.

The online community clearly provides better Linux support, but this naturally follows from the smaller Windows installed base.

There are also some potential concerns about how we maintain high-availability whilst also scaling out.

For how long have I used the solution?

Three to five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We have had no stability issues.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We have not used the scalability features yet.

How is customer service and technical support?

We have not used technical support.

Which solutions did we use previously?

No previous solution was used.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was straightforward. The online documentation was adequate and there is minimal initial configuration required to get up and running.

After that, it is simply a matter of experimentation with the various features and learning as you go.

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

This is an open source solution.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We looked at MSMQ, NServiceBus, Azure Service Bus, and Apache Kafka.

What other advice do I have?

I would recommend that anyone who intends to deploy RabbitMQ on Windows should first consider whether a Linux implementation is a viable option for their situation.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
1 Comment
author avatarMeir Joffe
Community Mgr

Thanks for the review Keith! I was wondering if you could perhaps elaborate on some of the "idiosyncrasies" you've experienced in Windows that you didn't in Linux. Thanks, Meir

Sign Up with Email