We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

ActiveMQ OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

ActiveMQ is the #5 ranked solution in our list of top Message Queue Software. It is most often compared to Apache Kafka: ActiveMQ vs Apache Kafka

What is ActiveMQ?

Apache ActiveMQ is the most popular and powerful open source messaging and Integration Patterns server.

Apache ActiveMQ is fast, supports many Cross Language Clients and Protocols, comes with easy to use Enterprise Integration Patterns and many advanced features while fully supporting JMS 1.1 and J2EE 1.4. Apache ActiveMQ is released under the Apache 2.0 License

ActiveMQ is also known as AMQ.

Buyer's Guide

Download the Message Queue (MQ) Software Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: October 2021

ActiveMQ Customers

University of Washington, Daugherty Systems, CSC, STG Technologies, Inc. 

ActiveMQ Video

Archived ActiveMQ Reviews (more than two years old)

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
it_user662949
Senior Consultant at a tech vendor with 1-10 employees
Consultant
It sends large messages at decent speeds.

What is most valuable?

The ability to send large messages at decent speeds.

How has it helped my organization?

It had no impact on the organization. We used it in a solution we built for somebody else.

What needs improvement?

Even though there is support from many open source communities, there is still weakness in ease-of-use and ease-of-configuration for more complex scenarios.

The speed is not the highest ranking, but it's well known by users. They chose ActiveMQ for other features, because they know there are other messaging solutions that can work faster, like RabbitMQ, which is not Java written, but rather Erlang.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using ActiveMQ for one year.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

There were no problems with stability.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

There were no scalability issues up to the point when I was involved in the project.

How are customer service and technical support?

I didn't use their technical support, just the classical StackOverflow support. That gave me enough information.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We didn't have a previous solution.

How was the initial setup?

The installation was straightforward. The framework we used, Spring, facilitates this integration.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We evaluated RabbitMQ.

What other advice do I have?

Make sure you need all the facilities that a message broker offers, as there are other lightweight solutions out there.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
ITCS user
Java Technical Lead at a tech services company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
I used it to implement a micro-services based architecture.

Pros and Cons

  • "The most important feature is that it's best for JVM-related languages and JMS integration."
  • "Message Management: Better management of the messages. Perhaps persist them, or put in another queue with another life cycle."

How has it helped my organization?

Most architecture nowadays requires too much performance. We can use products like ActiveMQ to improve our architecture.

I implemented a micro-services based architecture and did some of the communication via queues. I used actors with the Akka framework, and not only threads in Java.

What is most valuable?

The most important feature is that it's best for JVM-related languages and JMS integration.

The product is really straightforward. All the operations that you use are pretty simple and worked fine.

The deal is to write the correct logic.

What needs improvement?

Message Management: Better management of the messages. Perhaps persist them, or put in another queue with another life cycle.

To clarify, it needs some queues in memory with the same abstract logic that ActiveMQ provides. An interesting example could be the embedded Redis framework, or the Derby database for integration tests.

ActiveMQ does not persist the messages in the queue. So it would be fine if active has that feature, or some way to do it. So you can grab that message any time during the application lifecycle.

Apache Kafka has that feature.

The improvement could be the availability to persist the message in the
queue for any time along the app running.

Testing: I did not find a correct way to test the integration using Java, but rather only with manual testing.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We did not encounter any stability issues.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

There were no scalability issues. With a good strategy, we can scale onto large systems using ActiveMQ.

How is customer service and technical support?

I would give technical support a rating of 10/10. Despite the doubts that I encountered during the development, I could get the answer in the documentation.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is very easy. You don't need to install anything. Just run the start command or put the URL in the browser.

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

I think the software is free.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We evaluated Apache Kafka and also RabbitMQ. The choice was about the better integration with JMS.

What other advice do I have?

I fully recommend this product, but you need to have some expertise working with JMS and asynchronous tasks. You also need a correct strategy, or at least think about one.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, VMware, IBM and others in Message Queue (MQ) Software. Updated: October 2021.
542,608 professionals have used our research since 2012.
it_user660042
Manager, Site Reliability Engineering at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Vendor
Provides message delivery and mirroring. It does not scale out well.

What is most valuable?

Reliable message delivery and mirroring.

What needs improvement?

It does not scale out well. It ends up being very complex if you have a lot of mirror queues.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We did have scalability issues. It does not scale out well.

How are customer service and technical support?

As with a lot of FOSS (Free and Open Source Software), it is what you pay for.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

This is our first foray into the world of messages.

How was the initial setup?

The terminology and configuration took some time to learn. In some ways, it does not do what you think it will do, so be careful.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We looked at RabbitMQ and AWS SQS.

What

What is most valuable?

Reliable message delivery and mirroring.

What needs improvement?

It does not scale out well. It ends up being very complex if you have a lot of mirror queues.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We did have scalability issues. It does not scale out well.

How are customer service and technical support?

As with a lot of FOSS (Free and Open Source Software), it is what you pay for.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

This is our first foray into the world of messages.

How was the initial setup?

The terminology and configuration took some time to learn. In some ways, it does not do what you think it will do, so be careful.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We looked at RabbitMQ and AWS SQS.

What other advice do I have?

If you are getting started, go with Kafka.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
it_user660600
Sr Software Engineer - Enterprise Automation Systems at a tech services company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Consultant
It allows for asynchronous communication.

Pros and Cons

  • "It’s a JMS broker, so the fact that it can allow for asynchronous communication is valuable."
  • "The clustering for sure needs improvement. When we were using it, the only thing available was an active/passive relationship that had to be maintained via shared file storage. That model includes a single point of failure in that storage medium."

What is most valuable?

It’s a JMS broker, so the fact that it can allow for asynchronous communication is valuable.

What needs improvement?

The clustering for sure needs improvement. When we were using it, the only thing available was an active/passive relationship that had to be maintained via shared file storage. That model includes a single point of failure in that storage medium.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We didn’t encounter anything that wasn't a result of our own misguided uses.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We did have scalability issues.

How are customer service and technical support?

It's open source.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We didn’t have a previous solution.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was straightforward. Whatever you don’t know, you can find via Google pretty easily.

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

It’s open source, ergo free.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We didn’t seek alternatives. We were told to use this.

What other advice do I have?

Check out RabbitMQ. Run it in a Docker container out of Kubernetes with a persistent volume. You could probably do that with ActiveMQ, but it would require working with KahaDB, or establishing some other backend database pod.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
it_user656307
Consultant, Architect at a financial services firm with 201-500 employees
Vendor
Virtual topics and configuration of dead letter strategies are valuable features.

What is most valuable?

  • Virtual topics supporting easy scalability of topic consumers
  • Simple, yet flexible configuration of dead letter strategies
  • The master-slave group with shared storage cluster topology

How has it helped my organization?

Loose coupling of components by the use of messaging queues allows for completely separate component life cycles and ownership within the organization.

It also greatly contributes to application maintenance and managing incidents, since no component is synchronously coupled to the other.

These are important considerations in a micro-service environment such as ours.

What needs improvement?

The included admin web app is not sufficient and we ended up disabling it. Instead, we are instead using hawtio and Jolokia.

However, the audit logging in Jolokia is not detailed enough and we were forced to write our own audit filter.

Even with hawtio, some JMX operations are awkward. A better admin tool would be nice.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using ActiveMQ for approximately two years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We have not encountered any stability issues.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The documentation is very good. Since this is a widely used product, there are plenty of good examples of how to solve various tasks. We have not used any other technical support.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

The strategic architecture in the organization required a more lightweight, yet mature, capable, reliable, and scalable open source alternative.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We looked at Redis and RabbitMQ.

What other advice do I have?

  • One needs to understand how asynchronous messaging works and the idea behind it.
  • Plan your production environment and security requirements early on. This includes clustering, encrypted client traffic and read/write/admin rights on queues and topics.
  • All messages will have a unique message ID, but also consider generating and logging a unique ID per message in your sending application. This ID can be propagated as a JMS header to all receiving applications and logged, in order to facilitate traceability later on.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
it_user660651
Microservices Consultant at a transportation company with 501-1,000 employees
Vendor
Provides sequential message processing and message broadcasting. Distributed message processing would be a nice addition.

Pros and Cons

  • "Message broadcasting: There could be a use case sending the same message to all consumers. So as a producer, I broadcast the message to a topic. Then, whichever consumers are subscribed to the topic can consume the same message."
  • "Distributed message processing would be a nice addition."

How has it helped my organization?

It has improved message processing. It removes the tight coupling and asynchronous invocation.

What is most valuable?

  • Sequential message processing.
  • Message broadcasting: There could be a use case sending the same message to all consumers. So as a producer, I broadcast the message to a topic. Then, whichever consumers are subscribed to the topic can consume the same message.
  • JMX console: Provides a UI to visualize a list of queues and topics on the broker. We can see any pending message for particular topic/queue. It displays how many consumers are connected to a topic/queue. We can send a message from the JMX console to a topic/queue without the need of a producer to distribute the message.

What needs improvement?

  • Distributed message processing would be a nice addition.
  • An older version of ActiveMQ only provided failover, without a message spread across multiple nodes/broker. As with clusters (three nodes/broker), if one of the nodes goes down, other nodes should take the message and process it. If a message is consumed by a client, there was only one way to get the same message again.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We did not encounter many stability issues.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We did not encounter many scalability issues.

How are customer service and technical support?

It’s open source, so we can’t expect more tech support. But the documentation has helped a lot.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We used JMS embedded in an application. Because of scalability issues, the JMS console, and isolation, we switched to ActiveMQ.

How was the initial setup?

The setup was straightforward. Just download the extract and begin the startup script. That’s it.

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

I use open source with standard Apache licensing.

What other advice do I have?

ActiveMQ is a great messaging system for synchronizing call and "fire and forget" types of calls. It can be integrated with Spring, Camel, and Struts.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
it_user660048
Director of Data and Technology at a transportation company with 51-200 employees
Vendor
I appreciate the queue, durable topic, and selector features. I would like to see a forked solution of AMQ with AMQP.

Pros and Cons

  • "I appreciate many features including queue, topic, durable topic, and selectors. I also value a different support for different protocols such as MQTT and AMQP. It has full support for EIP, REST, Message Groups, UDP, and TCP."
  • "Needs to focus on a certain facet and be good at it, instead of handling support for most of the available message brokers."

How has it helped my organization?

We use this product to provide us with a real time solution. It has helped us find ways to:

  • Message or pass data, aside from hitting and saving data in a database.
  • Perform asynchronous messaging.
  • Queue database messages so requests are serial, if needed.
  • Scale the application by increasing worker nodes via topics and queue load balancing.

What is most valuable?

I appreciate many features including queue, topic, durable topic, and selectors. I also value a different support for different protocols such as MQTT and AMQP. It has full support for EIP, REST, Message Groups, UDP, and TCP.

What needs improvement?

I would like to see the following improvements:

  • The way it stores data
  • Needs to focus on a certain facet and be good at it, instead of handling support for most of the available message brokers.
  • For example, AMQP is a different flavor of message broker. However, adding it to ActiveMQ dramatically shifts its methodology and design. It can handle it, but it will be bad at it. Either you create a new forked solution of AMQ with AMQP and align only with AMQP, or just don't do it.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

There were stability issues. With a network of brokers, you get a lot of issues, especially if you have the publisher and consumer using the same channel or connection, on different topics and/or queues. It’s causing a lot of issues and weirdness.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Setting up a network of brokers is problematic. The best thing is to do master-slave with a cold backup.

How are customer service and technical support?

It is open source, so you get a very good response from the community. I heard Fuse is good, but I never talked to them.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We used to deploy Apache Kafka, as it was best for big data.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is easy, and you can embed the ActiveMQ on the test.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

Depending on the problem, AMQ resolved nearly everything. However, it may not be suitable for complex issues.

What other advice do I have?

For what and where it is used, depending on the project, it will be very good.

For example, if I need to use a web application that will have ability to have an embedded message queue, it can work perfectly.

But if I need to have solution for big data, it may not be the best, especially for large streaming data. It varies by use.

Vet other solutions before implementing anything. Run multiple tests, like multi- thread and flood it with messages, as well as large messages, and combinations of both. See how it behaves.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
ITCS user
Senior Micro Service Developer via The Marlo Group (Contractor) at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Vendor
Scalability is good as it has the concept of a "network of brokers", so there are no different queue names for distributed queues or physical queues.

What is most valuable?

Scalability is good as it has the concept of a "network of brokers", so there are no different queue names for distributed queues or physical queues.

The network of brokers scales by need but the queue name stays the same, hence the client does not need to worry about queue name change.

For example, if you use MQ from Oracle weblogic to implement messaging system with scalibility in mind, then you would implement one distributed queue on managed server and physical queues on each node, ideally the client connects to your distributed queue which has been configured to distribute messages to each physical queue by either round robin or weight policy etc.

In the above example, if you add new nodes then you have to add newly created physical queue to the distributed queue, or you have to inform the client what is the new physical queue name if your client choose to connect to the physical queue instead of distributed queue.

With the concept of the network of brokers, AMQ may add more brokers under load, but it always expose the same queue name to the client, so client won't notice the scale change and you don't need to config extra queues when it scales


How has it helped my organization?

It is cost effective and is a much cheaper solution compared to Weblogic or IBM MQ.

It has good performance in general use cases and is reliable.

It is easy to implement, especially in an MVP project for PoC.

It is easy to configure a composite queue for message forwarding.

What needs improvement?

We have had problems with the message selector as when the queue size reaches a certain level, the message selector does not have enough time to run and finish before the JMS reply timeout. In this case the client will not consume the JMS reply message even when the correlation ID matches.

Try not to use the hawt.io feature but use the AMQ console which is much better. If you have to use hawt.io , you may need to configure Jolokia, which is the JMX layer of hawt.io, to display queues properly if you have a lot of queues.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using the solution for about four years now.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I have not experienced any unstable situations.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I have not encountered any scalability issues.

How are customer service and technical support?

I have no experience with the technical support.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I have used Weblogic MQ and IBM MQ before, and I switched to AMQ because we wanted to have a cheaper, faster and easier solution for messages.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was very straightforward. Just follow the manual and there will be no issues.

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

I have no experience in enterprise pricing and licensing.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I have evaluated Rabbit MQ, which is the fastest solution, but AMQ has more features and better support.

What other advice do I have?

  • Try not to use the temp queue.
  • Pay attention to message selectors and queue size.
  • Pay attention to queue names as if you use a wrong queue name, AMQ won't report the error but it will create a new queue for you which is sometimes hard to investigate.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
it_user571818
Senior System Administrator for Cloud Operations at a tech company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Price point and licensing are the most valuable features relative to Websphere MQ. It needs some improvement playing with multi-platform message clients.

What is most valuable?

  • Price point and licensing are the most valuable features relative to our previous MQ solution (Websphere MQ).
  • Apache provides Docker images on the public registry for multiple versions of ActiveMQ. The value of the Apache-provided Docker image is that it spares developers from having to manually install ActiveMQ software. Using Docker, I can get a working ActiveMQ server up and running in minutes with zero knowledge of how the software is installed or what configuration files need to be tweaked, etc. Also, I can spin up an ActiveMQ farm of Docker containers within minutes if I want to test things like clustering, HA, etc. For something like concept testing or R&D, this is a fantastic way to save time and money.
  • Multi-protocol support: http://activemq.apache.org/protocols.html. As we began to explore integrating IoT solutions, ActiveMQ’s support of the MQTT protocol was very convenient!

How has it helped my organization?

This product enabled development teams at my previous organization to R&D much quicker with JMS based applications, which basically comprised the entire middleware layer of the organization. Previously, we would get stuck waiting for license procurement for the IBM solution, which wasted project time and budget.

What needs improvement?

Apache ActiveMQ needs some improvement playing with multi-platform message clients. It already plays really well with Java clients since it’s a JMS implementation, but it needs some improvement supporting clients written in other languages (like C#).

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using the solution for 18 months.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We have not encountered any stability issues.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We have not encountered any scalability issues.

How are customer service and technical support?

For an open source solution, support options are actually very robust: http://activemq.apache.org/support.html

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We previously used WebSphere MQ and switched mainly due to licensing costs.

How was the initial setup?

For us, initial setup was VERY easy since we were using the Apache-provided Docker image for ActiveMQ, which alleviates a lot of the traditional pains involved with installing new software.

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

This solution is awesome from both perspectives.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

Before choosing this product, we did not evaluate other options.

What other advice do I have?

If possible, use the Docker image that Apache foundation builds!

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
it_user571824
Project Staff at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees
Vendor
It is useful for apps that have a lot of messages.

What is most valuable?

The database and message queuing are valuable features. It is useful for apps that have a lot of messages as well.

How has it helped my organization?

Thanks to ActiveMQ, we have managed to set up an IoT application.

What needs improvement?

There is need for more protocols and maybe they should provide documentation on the internet as well.

During my summer internship, I developed a IoT application (a proof of concept). We had some Texas Instruments CC2650 sensors emitting to MQTT. For the first time, we wanted them to AMQP protocol with RabbitMQ, but the MQQT QoS 2 on RabbitMQ was a big problem. Thus, we switched to ActiveMQ. Unfortunately, we had to stay in MQTT, as ActiveMQ can’t translate protocols like RabbitMQ.

In the end, we used the ActiveMQ broker to get the messages from our sensors (using the Java Library by Hiram Chirino, mqtt-client), then we parsed the messages from the sensors and stored them in Apache Hbase. With all of this data, we made some statistics, graphs and various other useful stuff for the industrials.

About the documentation, it is more about the ActiveMQ advanced concepts such as using the KahaDB etc. For the protocols, maybe a translator is needed for example integration of AMQP to MQTT or XMPP to CoAP.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have used this solution during a summer internship last summer.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We have not yet encountered any stability issues.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We have not yet encountered any scalability issues. Currently, we are receiving 1000 messages per second (on an average).

How are customer service and technical support?

We have not used the technical support.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Previously, we were using RabbitMQ, but it didn’t support MQTT QoS 2.

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

It is a good, free and safe product.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We have tried Apache Apollo and RabbitMQ.

What other advice do I have?

Make sure your queues and topics are correctly named as it can quickly become a mess.

Overall, it is a good product but lacks some documentation.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
it_user590433
Site Reliability Engineer at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
Vendor
Delivers work to backend worker services that run tasks with variable run times. We ran into various stability problems with our implementations.

What is most valuable?

The valuable features are: Message queues Camel routes High availability Serialization of batch jobs Consumer/worker throttling Message durability

How has it helped my organization?

We use ActiveMQ primarily to deliver work to backend worker services that run tasks with extremely variable run times.

For how long have I used the solution?

I supported and used ActiveMQ from 2010-2016.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We ran into various stability problems with our implementations over the years. We also ran into a few problems related to bugs. One of the bugs was a memory leak from the KahaDB log files. As uptime accumulated, it eventually triggered one of the artificial limitations on the disk space used by KahaDB.

What

What is most valuable?

The valuable features are:

  • Message queues
  • Camel routes
  • High availability
  • Serialization of batch jobs
  • Consumer/worker throttling
  • Message durability

How has it helped my organization?

We use ActiveMQ primarily to deliver work to backend worker services that run tasks with extremely variable run times.

For how long have I used the solution?

I supported and used ActiveMQ from 2010-2016.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We ran into various stability problems with our implementations over the years. We also ran into a few problems related to bugs.

One of the bugs was a memory leak from the KahaDB log files. As uptime accumulated, it eventually triggered one of the artificial limitations on the disk space used by KahaDB.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

There have been no issues with scalability, but we had a pretty low message throughput.

How was the initial setup?

The installation was pretty straightforward. It was also easy setting up HA using an NFS share for hosting the KahaDB.

What other advice do I have?

Use the right tool for the job. Evaluate your needs carefully. Ensure that you do adequate performance, load, and failure mode testing prior to introducing the solution to production.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
ITCS user
Principal Architect at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Consultant
You can set up a network of brokers that can span WANs and geographies. Messages get forwarded to the broker where the demand is.

What is most valuable?

One of the most important features of ActiveMQ is the ability to set up a network of brokers, and the ability to forward the message to another broker in the network, where there is a demand for messages from a consumer. These brokers could span over WANs and geographies. The messages will get forwarded to the broker where the demand is, which is what makes this a distributed messaging system.

The 'Shared nothing' configuration, where each broker has its own DB instance, is very important. It ensures that every message is accounted for and persisted in the DB to be replayed in case of failure.

Load balancing is important when huge numbers of messages are coming in. The messages get distributed to all the brokers, which are connected. In case of failure of any one broker, the message automatically gets routed to other brokers, ensuring no loss of messages.

By default, the failover protocol uses a random algorithm to choose one of the underlying connectors. If the connection fails, the transport will pick another URI and try to make a connection. The network automatically passes messages to connected brokers that have interested consumers. The failover protocol ensures clients do not need to be manually restarted in the case of a broker failure. As soon as the broker becomes available again, the client will automatically reconnect.

We also appreciate the easy setup of persistent messages using a DB like Oracle.

What needs improvement?

The master-slave relationship between brokers needs some improvement.

In case of shared architecture between brokers (i.e., both brokers sharing same the DB instance), one becomes master and the others become slaves. In this situation, the master always consumes the message and the slave is always in a dormant condition. This makes load balancing impossible. Probably this can be improved upon.

Another area of improvement is the monitoring console, which is kind of rudimentary. There is no facility to trace the entire XML message and take corrective action, such as resending the message.

If these facilities are added, it will be very good.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using ActiveMQ for 2 months.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We have not had any stability issues.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We have not tested scalability.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We considered switching from WebLogic JMS, since we faced many issues including message affinity and lost messages.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was straightforward.

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

The pricing and license policies are pretty good.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
it_user578814
Freelancer at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Consultant
The product provides message-level acknowledging and message persistency.

What is most valuable?

Most valuable to us are fast asynchronous message queuing with message-level acknowledging and message persistency.

How has it helped my organization?

ActiveMQ operates as the message bus across single-purpose components. Thanks to ActiveMQ, the system is able to scale its heavy computing components during traffic peaks.

What needs improvement?

I would like to see improvement in the clustering brokers. Configuring ActiveMQ brokers for working in a cluster is difficult and has many constraints. Also, the configuration files are not intuitive.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using ActiveMQ for about 6 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We have not encountered any stability issues.

What do I think about

What is most valuable?

Most valuable to us are fast asynchronous message queuing with message-level acknowledging and message persistency.

How has it helped my organization?

ActiveMQ operates as the message bus across single-purpose components. Thanks to ActiveMQ, the system is able to scale its heavy computing components during traffic peaks.

What needs improvement?

I would like to see improvement in the clustering brokers. Configuring ActiveMQ brokers for working in a cluster is difficult and has many constraints. Also, the configuration files are not intuitive.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using ActiveMQ for about 6 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We have not encountered any stability issues.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The only issue we had concerned the practical limit of 2000 messages per broker, per second. The next step, which is multiplying brokers, worked well though.

How is customer service and technical support?

I have not used technical support so far.

How was the initial setup?

Initial setup is quite complex when done for a high performance system. The configuration files are not intuitive.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Product Categories
Message Queue (MQ) Software
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Message Queue (MQ) Software Report and find out what your peers are saying about Apache, VMware, IBM, and more!