Mule ESB Reviews

My primary uses are asset maintenance and data management.

The most valuable feature is that it's programmer-friendly, so it's very easy to develop APIs.

In order to meet the new trend of active metadata management, we need intelligent APIs that can retrieve new data designs and trigger actions over new findings without human intervention.

I've been using this solution for almost three years.

It's very stable and reliable.

This solution is scalable.

The technical support is reliable and quick to resolve any block we have.

The initial setup is straightforward and only takes a day, but it looks at many data sources, so you have to be specific about what you need. 

This product is expensive, but it does offer value for money.

I would give this product a rating of ten out of ten.

• Writing your complex business logic as a simple workflow which can be understood by not so technical people
• Hot deployment of those workflows, which helps in automation and self-learning/healing.
• Provides a variety of connectors: SalesForce, Twitter, SAP, Facebook, and WebService consumer. Most of them come for free with the Community Edition.
• Async/concurrent execution of services within a flow
• Logging

We had to design a complex diagnostic and analysis tool that catered to different ERPs. For example, connecting to different types of data sources and listening from different types of services (over Web and FTP).

Business services for diagnostics should be modified by admin/functional people and applications should be updated on-the-fly without any down time.

The Mule runtime engine served the purpose and we developed a drag-and-drop workflow designer (web app) that is built on top of Mule to make it easy for admins to create and edit services.

I’ve been using Mule ESB for 18 months.

We have had no issues with stability.

We did have scalability issues. It demanded more RAM at times, when there were a larger number of requests while listening over FTP. This is the case with any web container.

I am a Community Edition user, so I can’t comment about the enterprise support by Mule. However, you will not get an immediate response for your queries in any of the technical forums.

I did not use any ESB earlier, but this is the best Community Edition ESB available in the market. However, we abused it as a workflow engine.

To get an initial setup is straightforward.

1. Write a simple HTTP-based listener workflow.
2. Print whatever you send in a context path in a browser.
3. Dump it in a standalone runtime.
4. Start it.

I would advise using the Community Edition if you are developing an application as an additional service to a customer or a non-critical Tier-2 application. You can do this without support.

Apart from support and a few additional connectors, the enterprise edition is not so different from CE.

I was not part of choosing this solution.

Don’t abuse it. Be clear if you want a Mule application to solely solve your business problems, or if you want it as an add-on to solve a few problems that your main application can’t solve.

You may get into scalability issues if you are not clear about this basic difference.

DataWeave: It allows for complex mappings using a simple DSL (Domain Specific Language).

Integration between systems can often take several days. However, with MuleSoft ESB, it can take as little as fifteen minutes.

The CloudHub offering requires some time to mature. However, it is a good overall solution.

Some further details:

1. The AnypointMQ offering is not very stable, as such can cause issues
when dealing with high volume burst messages.

2. The CloudHub offering is EC2 instance based and does not run in
containers.

3. The speed of the CloudHub user interface is poor.

4. Deployment takes several minutes (due to Ec2 architecture as opposed to
containerization).

5. There is currently no cross application object store.

I have used MuleSoft ESB for six years.

CloudHub stability has been an issue. However, this is being worked on.

The product scales very well.

Technical support is superb. The engineers that support customers are Java developers and have a deep understanding of the issues and resolutions. This is one of the biggest selling points for MuleSoft.

Previously, we used Apache Camel and Spring Integration. However, they require more technical involvement than MuleSoft ESB.

The setup is done with a simple deployable .zip file. It is very simple to set up and run.

Pricing is tailored to the customer. As such, I would recommend speaking with your account representative.

We evaluated Dell Boomi, Informatica, and Talend. However, for the given use case, MuleSoft came out on top.

Focus on the business problem you want to solve, as the technical integration in MuleSoft is relatively simple.

I use ESB to do integrations for a company called Pelindo. Pelindo is a company that's a terminal operator. They are involved in logistics, have many partners, and require transaction detection and a payment gateway.

I like that Mule ESB provides fast and good technical support.

Mule ESB could be more user-friendly. I think users must learn about the architecture before they start coding. The price could be better. In the next release, I would like to see an EDIFACT integration.

I have been using Mule ESB since 2013, so nine years. 

Mule ESB is stable, but sometimes the traffic is unstable because the transaction rate increases and the server is obsolete.

Technical support is fast and good.

Positive

I think the initial setup was straightforward.

I have experience installing this solution for my company. I can also maintain  Mule ESB by myself.

I think the price is very high. If you use TIBCO BW, the license is for the CPU usage, then the IPS, and support. I also think the license for the product is a one-time expense. 

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Mule ESB an eight.

We use this solution for payment integration. We are customers of Mule ESC and I'm a co-founder and the data engineer head.

The solution has helped us to develop more quickly and improve our time to market. 

I like the graphical interface and the number of connectors. The solution is easy to maintain. 

I'd like to see more attention given to the community editions.  

I've been using this solution for 10 years. 

The solution is scalable and stable. 

The initial setup wasn't that complex, we did it ourselves.

We're using the open-source version. 

I rate the solution nine out of 10. 

In order of importance:

- Connectors

- Data Weave

- Mule Expression Language

It has changed our approach towards integration, making plumbing functions such as HTTP/Messaging listener services, data transformation and connection handling redundant.

Documentation is cryptic, product releases are far too frequent, and upgrades become troublesome.

1 year as a developer and architect.

Deployment of custom flows is troublesome and fraught with difficulty

We use Mule ESB to integrate different products like SAP and Salesforce. We also use it to transform data and communicate it in different versions. 

I like that it's user-friendly. Compared to other ESBs, I find it easier to use. I like it better than other ESBs. I like the connectors, which make calling the APIs through the routers easier.

The initial setup could be more straightforward.

I have used Mule ESB for about a year and a half.

Mule ESB is better than Oracle.

The initial setup is complex because of the Maven part.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Mule ESB an eight.

• API integration with many backend systems, deployment options, testing. 
• It helps me to manage API as well.

• For API creation and integrations in agile mode.
• Reduces the development cost and time as we work in agile mode.

Connectors: It has many connectors and components that really help to complete the development very quickly.

• Support, and with respect to licensing cost.
• Many of the customers feel that the licensing cost is much.