Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
ActiveMQ vs Disque: What are the differences?
Developers describe ActiveMQ as "A message broker written in Java together with a full JMS client". 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. On the other hand, Disque is detailed as "In-memory, distributed job queue". Disque is an ongoing experiment to build a distributed, in-memory, message broker. Its goal is to capture the essence of the "Redis as a jobs queue" use case, which is usually implemented using blocking list operations, and move it into an ad-hoc, self-contained, scalable, and fault tolerant design, with simple to understand properties and guarantees, but still resembling Redis in terms of simplicity, performance, and implementation as a C non-blocking networked server.
ActiveMQ and Disque belong to "Message Queue" category of the tech stack.
ActiveMQ and Disque are both open source tools. It seems that Disque with 7.37K GitHub stars and 516 forks on GitHub has more adoption than ActiveMQ with 1.5K GitHub stars and 1.05K GitHub forks.
Pros of ActiveMQ
- Easy to use18
- Open source14
- Efficient13
- JMS compliant10
- High Availability6
- Scalable5
- Distributed Network of brokers3
- Persistence3
- Support XA (distributed transactions)3
- Docker delievery1
- Highly configurable1
- RabbitMQ0
Pros of Disque
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of ActiveMQ
- ONLY Vertically Scalable1
- Support1
- Low resilience to exceptions and interruptions1
- Difficult to scale1