Active MQ vs JBoss Messaging

Question

I am going to choose a JMS message broker for a project. It is critical that the JMS server is stable and can handle a high load of messages. I have narrowed down the list to include Active MQ and JBoss Messaging.

I was wondering if any of you have any experience with any of these or even better have tried both of them in the same environment. Any link to a research paper or similar would be nice.

Solution 1

JBoss Messaging is now in bug fix mode only, since JBoss / Red Hat has a new Java messaging project called HornetQ.

The web site is here http://hornetq.org

HornetQ boasts extreme performance, a full feature set and ease of use.

You'll find it's performance compared to ActiveMQ is extremely good.

BTW - I am the project lead for JBoss Messaging and HornetQ.

HornetQ 2.0.0.GA is out in the next week.

Solution 2

http://activemq.apache.org/how-does-activemq-compare-to-jbossmq.html

Solution 3

JBoss recently redid their entire implementation of Messaging, ala JBoss MQ has been replaced with JBoss Messaging, and now again as "HornetQ". You'll just want to keep that in mind as that above comparison is very dated (not to mention probably biased).

Solution 4

Feature-by-feature comparisons are all very well, but my experience of ActiveMQ (through various versions over the years) is that it is shockingly buggy, and noone seems inclined to fix those bugs. It's deeply frustrating. Also, the documentation is messy and not properly updated with new versions.

JBossMessaging is relatively feature-light, compared to ActiveMQ, but it's rock-solid, well-documented and reliable. It's also part of JBossAS 5, and RedHat are doing a good job of supporting it.

Solution 5

HornetQ looks good.

http://www.spec.org/jms2007/results/jms2007.html

View more solutions

Comments

[maskefjes]

I am not interested in JBoss MQ but JBoss Messaging. And an independent report would be nice.....

[Eddie]

Note for those who don't know: JBoss Messaging is a rewrite of JBoss MQ that advertises much improved performance.

[skaffman]

JBossMQ may not scale as well as JBM, but to say "not scalable at all" is just plain wrong. We use it for fairly high volumes, and it handles this without a complaint or a problem.

[skaffman]

It's not a rewrite, really, it shares nothing in common with JBossMQ at all, other than being a JMS implementation with "JBoss" in the title.

[avro]

Sorry, I should have said hardly scalable. For example, MQ creates 3 threads per subscriber. If there is active messaging ongoing, it adds up to 10 other threads for such subscriber. On our MQ system we have an average of 3.5 threads per subscriber. Having 300 users served that makes 1000 threads just for MQ. If a message is put for all subscribes, 300 of those threads queue for CPU.