Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
ActiveMQ vs NSQ: 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, NSQ is detailed as "A realtime distributed messaging platform". 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 and NSQ can be primarily classified as "Message Queue" tools.
"Open source" is the top reason why over 9 developers like ActiveMQ, while over 23 developers mention "It's in golang" as the leading cause for choosing NSQ.
ActiveMQ and NSQ are both open source tools. It seems that NSQ with 15.6K GitHub stars and 2.03K forks on GitHub has more adoption than ActiveMQ with 1.5K GitHub stars and 1.05K GitHub forks.
According to the StackShare community, ActiveMQ has a broader approval, being mentioned in 33 company stacks & 17 developers stacks; compared to NSQ, which is listed in 21 company stacks and 8 developer stacks.
I am looking into IoT World Solution where we have MQTT Broker. This MQTT Broker Sits in one of the Data Center. We are doing a lot of Alert and Alarm related processing on that Data, Currently, we are looking into Solution which can do distributed persistence of log/alert primarily on remote Disk.
Our primary need is to use lightweight where operational complexity and maintenance costs can be significantly reduced. We want to do it on-premise so we are not considering cloud solutions.
We looked into the following alternatives:
Apache Kafka - Great choice but operation and maintenance wise very complex. Rabbit MQ - High availability is the issue, Apache Pulsar - Operational Complexity. NATS - Absence of persistence. Akka Streams - Big learning curve and operational streams.
So we are looking into a lightweight library that can do distributed persistence preferably with publisher and subscriber model. Preferable on JVM stack.
Kafka is best fit here. Below are the advantages with Kafka ACLs (Security), Schema (protobuf), Scale, Consumer driven and No single point of failure.
Operational complexity is manageable with open source monitoring tools.
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 NSQ
- It's in golang29
- Distributed20
- Lightweight20
- Easy setup18
- High throughput17
- Publish-Subscribe11
- Scalable8
- Save data if no subscribers are found8
- Open source6
- Temporarily kept on disk5
- Simple-to use2
- Free1
- Topics and channels concept1
- Load balanced1
- Primarily in-memory1
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
Cons of NSQ
- Long term persistence1
- Get NSQ behavior out of Kafka but not inverse1
- HA1
Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions
What is ActiveMQ?
What is NSQ?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
What companies use ActiveMQ?
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
What tools integrate with NSQ?
Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions
Blog Posts
+35