Technical Selection of message-oriented middleware-rabbitmq, activemq, and zeromq

Technical Selection of message-oriented middleware-rabbitmq, activemq, and zeromq
Chszs, which must be noted for reprinting. Blog homepage: http://blog.csdn.net/chszs

Rabbitmq, activemq, and zeromq are both excellent message-oriented middleware. But which of the following is more suitable for our project? Many developers are faced with this problem. Below I will make a comparison between the three message-oriented middleware. After reading this, you will be aware of it.

Rabbitmq is the first implementation of the amqp protocol. It implements the Broker Architecture, meaning that messages can be queued on the central node before being sent to the client. This feature makes rabbitmq easy to use and deploy. It is suitable for many scenarios, such as routing, Server Load balancer, and message persistence. You only need a few lines of code to use message queue. However, this results in poor scalability and slow speed. Due to the latency added to the central node, the message encapsulation is also larger than the latency.


Zeromq is a lightweight messaging system developed for high throughput/low latency scenarios. It is often found in financial applications. Compared with rabbitmq, zeromq supports many advanced message scenarios, but you must implement various blocks in the zeromq framework (such as socket or device ). Zeromq is flexible, but you have to learn its 80-page hand notebook (if you want to write a distributed system, you must read it ).


Activemq is similar to zemomq and can be deployed in both proxy and P2P modes. Similar to rabbitmq, it is easy to implement advanced scenarios and requires low consumption. It is known as the "Swiss Army Knife" of message-oriented middleware ".

Note that the next generation of activemq is Apollo.


Finally, these three products:
1. All have clientapis and support multiple programming languages;
2. There are a large number of documents;
3. All provide positive support.