RabbitMQ vs VerneMQ

Overview

RabbitMQ

Stacks21.8K

Followers18.9K

Votes558

GitHub Stars13.2K

Forks4.0K

VerneMQ

Stacks31

Followers136

Votes6

RabbitMQ vs VerneMQ: What are the differences?

Introduction: RabbitMQ and VerneMQ are both popular message broker solutions used for implementing a message queuing system in distributed applications. While both serve similar purposes, there are key differences between the two that make them suitable for specific use cases.

Protocol Support: RabbitMQ primarily supports AMQP (Advanced Message Queuing Protocol), which is an open-standard application layer protocol for message-oriented middleware. On the other hand, VerneMQ is specifically designed to support MQTT (Message Queuing Telemetry Transport) protocol, which is more lightweight and intended for IoT devices and high-throughput, low-latency scenarios.
Features: RabbitMQ offers advanced features such as message acknowledgments, message routing, and message queues. VerneMQ, on the other hand, focuses on features tailored for IoT applications, such as support for QoS (Quality of Service) levels, MQTT session persistence, and MQTT authentication mechanisms optimized for IoT use cases.
Scalability: RabbitMQ is known for its robust clustering capabilities, allowing horizontal scaling of message brokers to handle high loads and ensure fault tolerance. VerneMQ, while also scalable, is specifically optimized for handling massive numbers of concurrent MQTT connections typical in IoT applications.
Community and Ecosystem: RabbitMQ has a larger and more diverse community of users and contributors, resulting in extensive documentation, plugins, and third-party integrations. VerneMQ, being a more niche solution focused on MQTT, has a smaller but dedicated community and a growing ecosystem of tools and integrations specific to MQTT.
Ease of Use: RabbitMQ is widely recognized for its ease of setup and configuration, making it a popular choice for developers new to message queuing systems. VerneMQ, while still user-friendly, requires a deeper understanding of MQTT concepts and may have a steeper learning curve for beginners.
Use Cases: RabbitMQ is well-suited for general-purpose message queuing scenarios where AMQP protocol compatibility is desired. VerneMQ, on the other hand, excels in use cases requiring high-throughput, low-latency communication with large numbers of IoT devices using the MQTT protocol.

Summary: In summary, RabbitMQ and VerneMQ differ in protocol support, features, scalability, community size, ease of use, and ideal use cases, making each better suited for specific requirements in a distributed messaging system.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Detailed Comparison

RabbitMQ	VerneMQ
RabbitMQ gives your applications a common platform to send and receive messages, and your messages a safe place to live until received.	VerneMQ is a distributed MQTT message broker, implemented in Erlang/OTP. It's open source, and Apache 2 licensed. VerneMQ implements the MQTT 3.1, 3.1.1 and 5.0 specifications.
Robust messaging for applications;Easy to use;Runs on all major operating systems;Supports a huge number of developer platforms;Open source and commercially supported	Open Source, Apache 2 licensed; QoS 0, QoS 1, QoS 2; MQTT v5.0 fully implemented; Basic Authentication and Authorization; Bridge Support; $SYS Tree for monitoring and reporting; TLS (SSL) Encryption; Websockets Support; Cluster Support with sophisticated self-healing mechanisms; Queue Migration; Prometheus Monitoring; Logging (Console, Files, Syslog); Reporting to Graphite; Extensible Plugin architecture (Erlang, Elixir, Lua); WebHooks Plugins; Multiple Sessions per ClientId; Shared Subscriptions; Proxy Protocol v1, v2;
Statistics
GitHub Stars 13.2K	GitHub Stars -
GitHub Forks 4.0K	GitHub Forks -
Stacks 21.8K	Stacks 31
Followers 18.9K	Followers 136
Votes 558	Votes 6
Pros & Cons
Pros 235 It's fast and it works with good metrics/monitoring 80 Ease of configuration 60 I like the admin interface 52 Easy to set-up and start with 22 Durable Cons 9 Too complicated cluster/HA config and management 6 Needs Erlang runtime. Need ops good with Erlang runtime 5 Configuration must be done first, not by your code 4 Slow	Pros 1 Proxy Protocol support 1 Fully open source clustering 1 MQTT v5 implementation 1 Open Source Message and Metadata Persistence 1 Open Source Plugin System
Integrations
No integrations available	MySQL MongoDB PostgreSQL Memcached Redis

What are some alternatives to RabbitMQ, VerneMQ?

Kafka

Kafka is a distributed, partitioned, replicated commit log service. It provides the functionality of a messaging system, but with a unique design.

Celery

Celery is an asynchronous task queue/job queue based on distributed message passing. It is focused on real-time operation, but supports scheduling as well.

Amazon SQS

Transmit any volume of data, at any level of throughput, without losing messages or requiring other services to be always available. With SQS, you can offload the administrative burden of operating and scaling a highly available messaging cluster, while paying a low price for only what you use.

NSQ

NSQ is a realtime distributed messaging platform designed to operate at scale, handling billions of messages per day. It promotes distributed and decentralized topologies without single points of failure, enabling fault tolerance and high availability coupled with a reliable message delivery guarantee. See features & guarantees.

ActiveMQ

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.

ZeroMQ

The 0MQ lightweight messaging kernel is a library which extends the standard socket interfaces with features traditionally provided by specialised messaging middleware products. 0MQ sockets provide an abstraction of asynchronous message queues, multiple messaging patterns, message filtering (subscriptions), seamless access to multiple transport protocols and more.

Apache NiFi

An easy to use, powerful, and reliable system to process and distribute data. It supports powerful and scalable directed graphs of data routing, transformation, and system mediation logic.

Gearman

Gearman allows you to do work in parallel, to load balance processing, and to call functions between languages. It can be used in a variety of applications, from high-availability web sites to the transport of database replication events.

Memphis

Highly scalable and effortless data streaming platform. Made to enable developers and data teams to collaborate and build real-time and streaming apps fast.

IronMQ

An easy-to-use highly available message queuing service. Built for distributed cloud applications with critical messaging needs. Provides on-demand message queuing with advanced features and cloud-optimized performance.

Related Comparisons

RabbitMQ vs VerneMQ: What are the differences?

Protocol Support: RabbitMQ primarily supports AMQP (Advanced Message Queuing Protocol), which is an open-standard application layer protocol for message-oriented middleware. On the other hand, VerneMQ is specifically designed to support MQTT (Message Queuing Telemetry Transport) protocol, which is more lightweight and intended for IoT devices and high-throughput, low-latency scenarios.
Features: RabbitMQ offers advanced features such as message acknowledgments, message routing, and message queues. VerneMQ, on the other hand, focuses on features tailored for IoT applications, such as support for QoS (Quality of Service) levels, MQTT session persistence, and MQTT authentication mechanisms optimized for IoT use cases.
Scalability: RabbitMQ is known for its robust clustering capabilities, allowing horizontal scaling of message brokers to handle high loads and ensure fault tolerance. VerneMQ, while also scalable, is specifically optimized for handling massive numbers of concurrent MQTT connections typical in IoT applications.
Community and Ecosystem: RabbitMQ has a larger and more diverse community of users and contributors, resulting in extensive documentation, plugins, and third-party integrations. VerneMQ, being a more niche solution focused on MQTT, has a smaller but dedicated community and a growing ecosystem of tools and integrations specific to MQTT.
Ease of Use: RabbitMQ is widely recognized for its ease of setup and configuration, making it a popular choice for developers new to message queuing systems. VerneMQ, while still user-friendly, requires a deeper understanding of MQTT concepts and may have a steeper learning curve for beginners.
Use Cases: RabbitMQ is well-suited for general-purpose message queuing scenarios where AMQP protocol compatibility is desired. VerneMQ, on the other hand, excels in use cases requiring high-throughput, low-latency communication with large numbers of IoT devices using the MQTT protocol.

RabbitMQ vs VerneMQ

Overview