IronMQ vs RabbitMQ

Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

IronMQ

35
46
+ 1
36
RabbitMQ

14.4K
12.5K
+ 1
517
Add tool

IronMQ vs RabbitMQ: What are the differences?

IronMQ: Message Queue for any deployment. 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; RabbitMQ: A messaging broker - an intermediary for messaging. RabbitMQ gives your applications a common platform to send and receive messages, and your messages a safe place to live until received.

IronMQ and RabbitMQ belong to "Message Queue" category of the tech stack.

Some of the features offered by IronMQ are:

  • Instant High Availability- Runs on top cloud infrastructures and uses multiple high-availability data centers. Uses reliable datastores for message durability and persistence.
  • Easy to Use- IronMQ is super easy to use. Simply connect directly to the API endpoints and you're ready to create and use queues. There are also client libraries available in any language you want – Ruby, Python, PHP, Java, .NET, Go, Node.JS, and more
  • Scalable / High Performance- Built using high-performance languages designed for concurrency and runs on industrial-strength clouds. Push messages and stream data at will without worrying about memory limits or adding more servers.

On the other hand, RabbitMQ provides the following key features:

  • Robust messaging for applications
  • Easy to use
  • Runs on all major operating systems

"Great Support" is the primary reason why developers consider IronMQ over the competitors, whereas "It's fast and it works with good metrics/monitoring" was stated as the key factor in picking RabbitMQ.

RabbitMQ is an open source tool with 5.94K GitHub stars and 1.78K GitHub forks. Here's a link to RabbitMQ's open source repository on GitHub.

reddit, 9GAG, and Rainist are some of the popular companies that use RabbitMQ, whereas IronMQ is used by HotelTonight, Coinbase, and Hubble. RabbitMQ has a broader approval, being mentioned in 940 company stacks & 548 developers stacks; compared to IronMQ, which is listed in 9 company stacks and 5 developer stacks.

Advice on IronMQ and RabbitMQ
Pulkit Sapra
Needs advice
on
RabbitMQ
Kubernetes
and
Amazon SQS

Hi! I am creating a scraping system in Django, which involves long running tasks between 1 minute & 1 Day. As I am new to Message Brokers and Task Queues, I need advice on which architecture to use for my system. ( Amazon SQS, RabbitMQ, or Celery). The system should be autoscalable using Kubernetes(K8) based on the number of pending tasks in the queue.

See more
Replies (1)
Anis Zehani
Recommends
Kafka

Hello, i highly recommend Apache Kafka, to me it's the best. You can deploy it in cluster mode inside K8S, thus you can have a Highly available system (also auto scalable).

Good luck

See more
Needs advice
on
RabbitMQ
and
Celery

I am just a beginner at these two technologies.

Problem statement: I am getting lakh of users from the sequel server for whom I need to create caches in MongoDB by making different REST API requests.

Here these users can be treated as messages. Each REST API request is a task.

I am confused about whether I should go for RabbitMQ alone or Celery.

If I have to go with RabbitMQ, I prefer to use python with Pika module. But the challenge with Pika is, it is not thread-safe. So I am not finding a way to execute a lakh of API requests in parallel using multiple threads using Pika.

If I have to go with Celery, I don't know how I can achieve better scalability in executing these API requests in parallel.

See more
Replies (1)
Recommends
Redis
rq

For large amounts of small tasks and caches I have had good luck with Redis and RQ. I have not personally used celery but I am fairly sure it would scale well, and I have not used RabbitMQ for anything besides communication between services. If you prefer python my suggestions should feel comfortable.

Sorry I do not have a more information

See more
Meili Triantafyllidi
Software engineer at Digital Science · | 5 upvotes · 154.8K views
Needs advice
on
ZeroMQ
RabbitMQ
and
Amazon SQS

Hi, we are in a ZMQ set up in a push/pull pattern, and we currently start to have more traffic and cases that the service is unavailable or stuck. We want to: * Not loose messages in services outages * Safely restart service without losing messages (ZeroMQ seems to need to close the socket in the receiver before restart manually)

Do you have experience with this setup with ZeroMQ? Would you suggest RabbitMQ or Amazon SQS (we are in AWS setup) instead? Something else?

Thank you for your time

See more
Replies (1)
Shishir Pandey
Recommends
RabbitMQ

ZeroMQ is fast but you need to build build reliability yourself. There are a number of patterns described in the zeromq guide. I have used RabbitMQ before which gives lot of functionality out of the box, you can probably use the worker queues example from the tutorial, it can also persists messages in the queue.

I haven't used Amazon SQS before. Another tool you could use is Kafka.

See more
André Almeida
Technology Manager at GS1 Portugal - Codipor · | 5 upvotes · 148.1K views
Needs advice
on
RabbitMQ
and
Azure Service Bus

Hello dear developers, our company is starting a new project for a new Web App, and we are currently designing the Architecture (we will be using .NET Core). We want to embark on something new, so we are thinking about migrating from a monolithic perspective to a microservices perspective. We wish to containerize those microservices and make them independent from each other. Is it the best way for microservices to communicate with each other via ESB, or is there a new way of doing this? Maybe complementing with an API Gateway? Can you recommend something else different than the two tools I provided?

We want something good for Cost/Benefit; performance should be high too (but not the primary constraint).

Thank you very much in advance :)

See more
Replies (2)

A Pro of Azure Service Bus is reliability and persistence: you can send message when receiver is offline; receiver can read it when it back online. A Cons is costs and message size. You can consider also SignalR

See more
Recommends

There are many different messaging frameworks available for IPC use. It's not really a question of how "new" the technology is, but what you need it to do. Azure Service Bus can be a great service to use, but it can also take a lot of effort to administrate and maintain that can make it costly to use unless you need the more advanced features it offers for routing, sequencing, delivery, etc. I would recommend checking out this link to get a basic idea of different messaging architectures. These only cover Azure services, but there are many other solutions that use similar architectural models.

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/event-grid/compare-messaging-services

See more
Needs advice
on
Redis
RabbitMQ
and
Kafka

We are going to develop a microservices-based application. It consists of AngularJS, ASP.NET Core, and MSSQL.

We have 3 types of microservices. Emailservice, Filemanagementservice, Filevalidationservice

I am a beginner in microservices. But I have read about RabbitMQ, but come to know that there are Redis and Kafka also in the market. So, I want to know which is best.

See more
Replies (4)
Maheedhar Aluri
Recommends
Kafka

Kafka is an Enterprise Messaging Framework whereas Redis is an Enterprise Cache Broker, in-memory database and high performance database.Both are having their own advantages, but they are different in usage and implementation. Now if you are creating microservices check the user consumption volumes, its generating logs, scalability, systems to be integrated and so on. I feel for your scenario initially you can go with KAFKA bu as the throughput, consumption and other factors are scaling then gradually you can add Redis accordingly.

See more
Recommends
Angular 2

I first recommend that you choose Angular over AngularJS if you are starting something new. AngularJs is no longer getting enhancements, but perhaps you meant Angular. Regarding microservices, I recommend considering microservices when you have different development teams for each service that may want to use different programming languages and backend data stores. If it is all the same team, same code language, and same data store I would not use microservices. I might use a message queue, in which case RabbitMQ is a good one. But you may also be able to simply write your own in which you write a record in a table in MSSQL and one of your services reads the record from the table and processes it. The most challenging part of doing it yourself is writing a service that does a good job of reading the queue without reading the same message multiple times or missing a message; and that is where RabbitMQ can help.

See more
Amit Mor
Software Architect at Payoneer · | 3 upvotes · 284.7K views
Recommends
Kafka

I think something is missing here and you should consider answering it to yourself. You are building a couple of services. Why are you considering event-sourcing architecture using Message Brokers such as the above? Won't a simple REST service based arch suffice? Read about CQRS and the problems it entails (state vs command impedance for example). Do you need Pub/Sub or Push/Pull? Is queuing of messages enough or would you need querying or filtering of messages before consumption? Also, someone would have to manage these brokers (unless using managed, cloud provider based solution), automate their deployment, someone would need to take care of backups, clustering if needed, disaster recovery, etc. I have a good past experience in terms of manageability/devops of the above options with Kafka and Redis, not so much with RabbitMQ. Both are very performant. But also note that Redis is not a pure message broker (at time of writing) but more of a general purpose in-memory key-value store. Kafka nowadays is much more than a distributed message broker. Long story short. In my taste, you should go with a minialistic approach and try to avoid either of them if you can, especially if your architecture does not fall nicely into event sourcing. If not I'd examine Kafka. If you need more capabilities than I'd consider Redis and use it for all sorts of other things such as a cache.

See more
Recommends
NATS

We found that the CNCF landscape is a good advisor when working going into the cloud / microservices space: https://landscape.cncf.io/fullscreen=yes. When choosing a technology one important criteria to me is if it is cloud native or not. Neither Redis, RabbitMQ nor Kafka is cloud native. The try to adapt but will be replaced eventually with technologies that are cloud native.

We have gone with NATS and have never looked back. We haven't spend a single minute on server maintainance in the last year and the setup of a cluster is way too easy. With the new features NATS incorporates now (and the ones still on the roadmap) it is already and will be sooo much mure than Redis, RabbitMQ and Kafka are. It can replace service discovery, load balancing, global multiclusters and failover, etc, etc.

Your thought might be: But I don't need all of that! Well, at the same time it is much more leightweight than Redis, RabbitMQ and especially Kafka.

See more
Needs advice
on
RabbitMQ
and
Kafka

Our backend application is sending some external messages to a third party application at the end of each backend (CRUD) API call (from UI) and these external messages take too much extra time (message building, processing, then sent to the third party and log success/failure), UI application has no concern to these extra third party messages.

So currently we are sending these third party messages by creating a new child thread at end of each REST API call so UI application doesn't wait for these extra third party API calls.

I want to integrate Apache Kafka for these extra third party API calls, so I can also retry on failover third party API calls in a queue(currently third party messages are sending from multiple threads at the same time which uses too much processing and resources) and logging, etc.

Question 1: Is this a use case of a message broker?

Question 2: If it is then Kafka vs RabitMQ which is the better?

See more
Replies (4)
Tarun Batra
Back End Developer at instabox · | 7 upvotes · 239.9K views
Recommends
RabbitMQ

RabbitMQ is great for queuing and retrying. You can send the requests to your backend which will further queue these requests in RabbitMQ (or Kafka, too). The consumer on the other end can take care of processing . For a detailed analysis, check this blog about choosing between Kafka and RabbitMQ.

See more
Trevor Rydalch
Software Engineer at InsideSales.com · | 6 upvotes · 239.8K views
Recommends
RabbitMQ

Well, first off, it's good practice to do as little non-UI work on the foreground thread as possible, regardless of whether the requests take a long time. You don't want the UI thread blocked.

This sounds like a good use case for RabbitMQ. Primarily because you don't need each message processed by more than one consumer. If you wanted to process a single message more than once (say for different purposes), then Apache Kafka would be a much better fit as you can have multiple consumer groups consuming from the same topics independently.

Have your API publish messages containing the data necessary for the third-party request to a Rabbit queue and have consumers reading off there. If it fails, you can either retry immediately, or publish to a deadletter queue where you can reprocess them whenever you want (shovel them back into the regular queue).

See more
Recommends
RabbitMQ

In my opinion RabbitMQ fits better in your case because you don’t have order in queue. You can process your messages in any order. You don’t need to store the data what you sent. Kafka is a persistent storage like the blockchain. RabbitMQ is a message broker. Kafka is not a good solution for the system with confirmations of the messages delivery.

See more
Guillaume Maka
Full Stack Web Developer · | 2 upvotes · 239.3K views
Recommends
RabbitMQ

As far as I understand, Kafka is a like a persisted event state manager where you can plugin various source of data and transform/query them as event via a stream API. Regarding your use case I will consider using RabbitMQ if your intent is to implement service inter-communication kind of thing. RabbitMQ is a good choice for one-one publisher/subscriber (or consumer) and I think you can also have multiple consumers by configuring a fanout exchange. RabbitMQ provide also message retries, message cancellation, durable queue, message requeue, message ACK....

See more
Needs advice
on
Redis
RabbitMQ
and
Kafka

Hello! [Client sends live video frames -> Server computes and responds the result] Web clients send video frames from their webcam then on the back we need to run them through some algorithm and send the result back as a response. Since everything will need to work in a live mode, we want something fast and also suitable for our case (as everyone needs). Currently, we are considering RabbitMQ for the purpose, but recently I have noticed that there is Redis and Kafka too. Could you please help us choose among them or anything more suitable beyond these guys. I think something similar to our product would be people using their webcam to get Snapchat masks on their faces, and the calculated face points are responded on from the server, then the client-side draw the mask on the user's face. I hope this helps. Thank you!

See more
Replies (3)
Jordi Martínez
Senior software architect at Bootloader · | 3 upvotes · 190.5K views
Recommends
Kafka

For your use case, the tool that fits more is definitely Kafka. RabbitMQ was not invented to handle data streams, but messages. Plenty of them, of course, but individual messages. Redis is an in-memory database, which is what makes it so fast. Redis recently included features to handle data stream, but it cannot best Kafka on this, or at least not yet. Kafka is not also super fast, it also provides lots of features to help create software to handle those streams.

See more
Recommends
RabbitMQ

For this kind of use case I would recommend either RabbitMQ or Kafka depending on the needs for scaling, redundancy and how you want to design it.

Kafka's true value comes into play when you need to distribute the streaming load over lot's of resources. If you were passing the video frames directly into the queue then you'd probably want to go with Kafka however if you can just pass a pointer to the frames then RabbitMQ should be fine and will be much simpler to run.

Bear in mind too that Kafka is a persistent log, not just a message bus so any data you feed into it is kept available until it expires (which is configurable). This can be useful if you have multiple clients reading from the queue with their own lifecycle but in your case it doesn't sound like that would be necessary. You could also use a RabbitMQ fanout exchange if you need that in the future.

See more
Recommends
RabbitMQ

I've used all of them and Kafka is hard to set up and maintain. Mostly is a Java dinosaur that you can set up and. I've used it with Storm but that is another big dinosaur. Redis is mostly for caching. The queue mechanism is not very scalable for multiple processors. Depending on the speed you need to implement on the reliability I would use RabbitMQ. You can store the frames(if they are too big) somewhere else and just have a link to them. Moving data through any of these will increase cost of transportation. With Rabbit, you can always have multiple consumers and check for redundancy. Hope it clears out your thoughts!

See more
Decisions about IronMQ and RabbitMQ
Kirill Mikhailov

Maybe not an obvious comparison with Kafka, since Kafka is pretty different from rabbitmq. But for small service, Rabbit as a pubsub platform is super easy to use and pretty powerful. Kafka as an alternative was the original choice, but its really a kind of overkill for a small-medium service. Especially if you are not planning to use k8s, since pure docker deployment can be a pain because of networking setup. Google PubSub was another alternative, its actually pretty cheap, but I never tested it since Rabbit was matching really good for mailing/notification services.

See more
Mickael Alliel
DevOps Engineer at Rookout · | 4 upvotes · 214.8K views

In addition to being a lot cheaper, Google Cloud Pub/Sub allowed us to not worry about maintaining any more infrastructure that needed.

We moved from a self-hosted RabbitMQ over to CloudAMQP and decided that since we use GCP anyway, why not try their managed PubSub?

It is one of the better decisions that we made, and we can just focus about building more important stuff!

See more
Get Advice from developers at your company using Private StackShare. Sign up for Private StackShare.
Learn More
Pros of IronMQ
Pros of RabbitMQ
  • 12
    Great Support
  • 8
    Heroku Add-on
  • 3
    Push support
  • 3
    Delayed delivery upto 7 days
  • 2
    Super fast
  • 2
    Language agnostic
  • 2
    Good analytics/monitoring
  • 2
    Ease of configuration
  • 2
    GDPR Compliant
  • 229
    It's fast and it works with good metrics/monitoring
  • 79
    Ease of configuration
  • 58
    I like the admin interface
  • 50
    Easy to set-up and start with
  • 20
    Durable
  • 18
    Standard protocols
  • 18
    Intuitive work through python
  • 10
    Written primarily in Erlang
  • 8
    Simply superb
  • 6
    Completeness of messaging patterns
  • 3
    Scales to 1 million messages per second
  • 3
    Reliable
  • 2
    Supports AMQP
  • 2
    Better than most traditional queue based message broker
  • 2
    Distributed
  • 1
    High performance
  • 1
    Runs on Open Telecom Platform
  • 1
    Reliability
  • 1
    Supports MQTT
  • 1
    Inubit Integration
  • 1
    Clusterable
  • 1
    Clear documentation with different scripting language
  • 1
    Great ui
  • 1
    Better routing system

Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions

Cons of IronMQ
Cons of RabbitMQ
  • 1
    Can't use rabbitmqadmin
  • 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

Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions

- No public GitHub repository available -

What is 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.

What is RabbitMQ?

RabbitMQ gives your applications a common platform to send and receive messages, and your messages a safe place to live until received.

Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

What companies use IronMQ?
What companies use RabbitMQ?
See which teams inside your own company are using IronMQ or RabbitMQ.
Sign up for Private StackShareLearn More

Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions

What tools integrate with IronMQ?
What tools integrate with RabbitMQ?

Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions

Blog Posts

+47
49
69258
+34
29
40686
+42
52
19829
+25
7
2827
+24
13
16728
+44
109
49943
What are some alternatives to IronMQ and RabbitMQ?
Kafka
Kafka is a distributed, partitioned, replicated commit log service. It provides the functionality of a messaging system, but with a unique design.
CloudAMQP
Fully managed, highly available RabbitMQ servers and clusters, on all major compute platforms.
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.
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.
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.
See all alternatives