We are using ActiveMQ 5.2 as our implementation of choice and we picked it a while ago. It performs well enough for our use right now. Since its been a while, I was wondering what other Java Message Service implementations are in use and why? Surely there are more than a few.
10 Answers
We rely on AMQ (5.1) via the Camel framework, and there haven't been any issues. AMQ 4 was a tad more fishy.
Sun's Open source OpenMQ (https://mq.dev.java.net/). You can get free and paid support for the same.
See this blog post about some comparison with ActiveMQ, etc -- http://alexismp.wordpress.com/2008/06/06/openmq-the-untold-story/.
I've heard that OpenMQ is more stable.
ActiveMQ is more flexible. as in, you can use it with more languages. There are probably more people on ActiveMQ's mailing list than OpenMQ.
In one of the recent projects I was in we used Sonic MQ. Good overall implementation with good bindings to .NET.
We had a little of scalability problems, but I have to admit that the scalability requirements were very strict: if I can recall correctly, something like 20,000 messes a second with no delays allowed between the 200 different clients (every client had to receive every message at the same time).
I've used JBossMQ, which comes with JBoss app server up to version 4, and which is solid but limited. JBoss Messaging was the replacement, comes with JBossAS 5, and is a huge improvement.
ActiveMQ I have a real dislike for. The developer(s) seem to have gone for performance and features to the detriment of stability, and it's phenomenally buggy. Given that it's the JMS fabric for Geronimo, I worry.
IBM WebSphere MQ 5 and 6 Active MQ 5.2.0
Also Check out Micro QueueManager at http://codingjunky.com/page5/page4/page4.html It is small, easy to install and use for smaller projects.
We are using SonicMQ, JBossMQ and the "micro broker" of Lotus Expeditor Integrator. We are using them for different purposes:
-JBossMQ is used internally and to communicate out of all our Java EE applications which run on JBoss. -Lotus Expeditor is used in "remote sites" where we do only have limited resources and IT staff -SonicMQ is our Messaging backbone, we use it for connecting central systems, but also to connect remote systems in approx. 1000 sites.
We are having good experiences with all of them, but our experience is also that with a more complex environment you have to do a more active administration of the Messaging system. This became especially true with SonicMQ at our site :-) . From a performance perspective we made the best experiences with SonicMQ especially in Queue based persistent messaging.
Related