ActiveMQ Reviews

ActiveMQ users appreciate its open-source nature, highlighting its cost-free availability and standard Apache licensing. Many rely on the open-source version without incurring licensing costs. Some find pricing policies favorable and consider it a more affordable option compared to JMS and Kafka. The open-source aspect makes it accessible for enterprises seeking cost-effective messaging solutions with no initial fees. Pricing is viewed as competitive within the market, aligning well with enterprise needs.

• "The solution is less expensive than its competitors."
• "The tool's pricing is reasonable and competitive compared to other solutions."
• "ActiveMQ is open source, so it is free to use."

Organizations primarily utilize ActiveMQ for messaging between applications and microservices. They employ it for event message management, ensuring controlled processing, and handling communication between services asynchronously. ActiveMQ serves as a middleware to process payloads and broker messages within architectures, enabling efficient information flow. It is also used to manage data flow in systems like IoT devices and digital IDs, reacting to events and reducing manual interactions while maintaining data consistency across platforms.

ActiveMQ's customer support varies. Multiple users rely on community forums and documentation, which are deemed robust. Technical support from Apache is generally well-regarded, with ratings as high as 10/10, although response times may vary. Many prefer open-source communities like GitHub and StackOverflow. Some have mentioned challenges in finding regional commercial support. Despite the absence of direct technical interactions, users often find solutions online, citing the supportive and large Apache community.

Setup experiences with ActiveMQ range from straightforward to complex. Many find it easy, especially with Docker, Apache tools, or when embedding. However, some face challenges due to unfamiliarity with configuration files and client installation. Using Docker or Ansible simplifies the process, while high-performance systems can complicate things. Configuration and terminology may require a learning curve. For experienced users, deploying takes minutes, but newcomers might encounter difficulties initially. Spring framework aids integration for some.

Many have found ActiveMQ handles scalability effectively with various configurations like multiplying brokers. Some experienced scalability limitations, especially at high throughput or complex setups. Several users noted ActiveMQ's ability to vertically and horizontally scale, although not automatically. Medium-sized enterprises fare well with its capabilities, requiring careful planning for larger systems. While practical for growing users and applications, professional support may be needed to ensure optimal scale handling.

ActiveMQ demonstrates a blend of stability experiences. Many users report no stability issues, while others have encountered problems, particularly when configurations or implementations are suboptimal. Instances of bugs and memory leaks have been noted, impacting uptime and requiring manual intervention. However, proper setup can ensure stable performance. The majority agree that ActiveMQ is comparably stable, though some rate it lower due to occasional interruptions, reflecting diverse user experiences in production environments. Stability often depends on configuration and usage context.