One of the most popular comparisons on IT Central Station is IBM MQ vs RabbitMQ?
Which of these two solutions would you recommend as a Message Queue soluton? Why?
Both have their Pros and Cons. It depends on what you are looking for exactly.
Throughput - IBM then SOLACE then Rabbit MQ
Features - IBM MQ 9 = Rabbit MQ, SOLACE lags a bit
Support - IBM then Rabbit, you can go for SOLACE OEM support if you are Mr. Moneybags.
It is easier to get support at the end application level for IBM MQ than Rabbit MQ for day to day running. Saying this from first hand experience. Debugging and maintenance resources are also more readily available for IBM MQ.
If infra is stable, IBM MQ will give better persistence than anyone else in the market.
I would go with IBM MQ.
I say RabbitMQ over IBM MQ. RabbitMQ has a number of things going for it, free to use, easy to set up and enjoys wide community backing. Since the team is part of Pivotal, it also has a solid backing and superb engineering.
RabbitMQ (IMHO) also embases a more modern style of messaging queuing. While it might not meet certain other products in pure throughput, its ease, support for both on-premise, PaaS and public clouds make it the winner. And keep in mind that tens of thousands of companies use it in production.
Go RabbitMQ. Leave that proprietary stuff behind (especially when the open source _is_ the better product).
My experience covers RabbitMQ but not IBM MQ, so I am not able to make a direct recommendation.
I would, however, say that it would probably be impossible to recommend one over the other as a general rule; the right solution will almost certainly depend upon the precise situation that is being addressed. Best to take things on a case-by-case basis!
Unfortunately, until now I haven't used any of them. But I have made some stress tests on RabbitMQ on persistence mode and the performance was great.
IBM MQ is by far the superior product, robust, works like they say it does, etc.
I pretty much agree with previous comments; IBM MQ is rock solid; IBM MQ Concentrator could be leveraged for license/cost saving options. You might want to consider Apache Kafka if it fits with your usecase.
I would need to raise the vendor flag here and come back with IBM MQ.
It may have a steeper learning curve compared to Rabbit but on the other hand who are you going to call in the middle of the night when you have an incident and don't know how to fix it?
It is solid, and most of the banks use it. That should speak for itself about quality.
The development edition has been free for over 2 years now, and the cost per core is really affordable for QA and production. It is a very versatile product, has great following see www.mqseries.net and the Vienna university list server https://listserv.meduniwien.ac.at/cgi-bin/wa?A1=ind1803&L=mqser-l
Well, I have experienced both. And What Can I say? Nowadays I would prefer Rabbit rather than IBM because Rabbit addressed very well the requirements, has a great throughput (Not as good as Kafka https://www.itcentralstation.com/products/apache-kafka?tid=il-q) and its free.
Also, it was a little bit easier to integrate (But that is not the main point), much easier to find online help to solve your daily problems.
IBM has licensed support but to solve daily problems I used to go to google but never found what I needed in a few minutes.
Depends on the use case requirements…
For most cases, I will recommend RMQ before IBM MQ…
There are certain cases of elevated security that might push the scale into IBM’s court.
Encryption of messages might be one of those cases.
Enhanced DR capabilities on the message queue level might be another…
The two case above are very specific edge cases and not typically solved by a queuing solution.
So I would go with RMQ almost all the time.
If you were talking to someone whose organization is considering IBM MQ, what would you say?
How would you rate it and why? Any other tips or advice?