My main use case for IBM MQ is its integration with APIs, and what we do is have a workflow system. In order to trigger the workflow, which is more of an asynchronous processing, we send a message to the workflow through IBM MQ, where the workflow listens to the IBM MQ message and then starts creating the case in the workflow system.
IBM MQ and IBM MQ Advanced (software)
IBM SoftwareExternal reviews
191 reviews
from
and
External reviews are not included in the AWS star rating for the product.
Asynchronous messaging has streamlined workflow triggers and supports reliable session rollbacks
What is our primary use case?
What is most valuable?
The best features IBM MQ offers are the topic and subscription, as well as the IBM MQ session and message rollbacks, especially for JMS integration. IBM MQ serves as the underlying foundation for our JMS messages.
IBM MQ has positively impacted my organization by enabling asynchronous processing, which means we do not need to wait for any responses from our downstream systems.
What needs improvement?
IBM MQ can be improved by having a feature where a message can be rolled back, especially if I want to go back to a particular message.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using IBM MQ for around ten years, including five years and another five years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
IBM MQ is stable.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
IBM MQ's scalability is very good; we have clusters in place, so we are satisfied with its performance.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
Before choosing IBM MQ, I did not evaluate other options.
What other advice do I have?
I would rate IBM MQ a nine out of ten; it is an excellent product, but it requires more additional features similar to Kafka. I would advise others looking into using IBM MQ to consider it as the best product for asynchronous data communication between systems.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Private Cloud
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
The tried and true workhorse of medium to high volume message queueing & processing
What do you like best about the product?
What I like the most, is the system's reliability , performance and throughput strength for message processing and distribution between systems or components. Even when only using a single unit of work , it's performance is very consistent for medium to high volume of messages being processed and distributed. The product itself is easy to install and maintain across many platforms (AIX , RHEL & Microsoft Windows are the one's I've personally worked with and can vouch for). And there are plenty of libraries to leverage MQ for different technology stacks. IBM also has solid documentation on the product and since this product itself is very mature and widely used, there's plenty of knowledge base to find throughout the internet.
If your system needs an engine to manage and process medium to high volumes of messages, IBM MQ is the product you can rely on to handle and scale as your products and services grow.
If your system needs an engine to manage and process medium to high volumes of messages, IBM MQ is the product you can rely on to handle and scale as your products and services grow.
What do you dislike about the product?
One of the things where IBM MQ may fall short a bit , is implementing secure connections between MQ and clients or other MQ's , due to the limitations of TLS handshaking for a IBM MQ channel , having to be tied to a specific algorithm ( usually the one used for the signature algorithm of the certificate being used ) instead of a natural SSL handshake negotiation. This can be tricky if you're integrating 3rd parties with your systems using IBM MQ as it requires a coordination effort to establish the cipherSpec negotiations. It can be tricky to perform hardening of IBM MQ considering how quickly can the winds shift on the security spectrum of technology.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Let's me process large volume of payment transactions. Integrate with Mainframe Cobol programs as a mean of communication of data. It also allows my sytems to hold and later resume, in case of any system failure, transactions that need to be processed, or already processed and need to be logged in a system. Allowing business continuity in case of system failures.
Reliable Messaging and Continuous Innovation with IBM MQ
What do you like best about the product?
The essential power of using asynchronous messaging to decouple services and ensure reliable message delivery. Furthermore, the team behind IBM MQ is constantly evolving the product to meet modern challenges.
What do you dislike about the product?
Its event-driven potential is frequently overshadowed
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Decoupling applications and integrations.
Building event driven solutions
Building event driven solutions
Has provided strong security, reliable integrations, and vendor-backed support for continuous data exchange
What is our primary use case?
The main use cases with IBM MQ recently would be more of a publish and subscribe mechanism where we have multiple subscribers for the same data which is getting published and that's where we have utilized it.
However, we are moving away from it because it has limited options for scaling up and down.
Additionally, the licensing was one of the factors since it was a licensed copy and it cost us whenever we needed to scale up and down. That's where we are moving to Apache-based services such as Kafka.
What is most valuable?
The best features of IBM MQ were stability and straightforward application functionality. It has vendor support, which was a significant advantage. In case of any production issues, we definitely get vendor support, whereas with Kafka and others, we have to rely on open community and our research.
We have utilized high availability with IBM MQ through clustering in place, which was in the cloud. It was always available for us and worked very effectively. The only issue we encountered was related to scaling up and down, which required installing additional servers from a hardware perspective.
Regarding IBM MQ's transactional integrity and maintaining data consistency, it performs effectively and I never faced any issues with respect to transactions or data loss.
The management tools come along with Universal Messaging, so explicit implementation of other tools isn't necessary.
IBM MQ comes with all the necessary encryption options and security features that we need.
What needs improvement?
The main differences between these two products, both pros and cons, in my opinion, mainly concern the scale up and scale down capabilities, which are more impacting us.
Apart from that, I don't see any issues.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have dealt with this product, IBM MQ Universal Messaging, for close to four years now. Previously it was Software AG before being taken over by IBM.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
It has vendor support, which was a significant advantage. In case of any production issues, we definitely get vendor support, whereas with Kafka and others, we have to rely on open community and our research.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
IBM MQ has limitations regarding scaling options. The licensing costs associated with scaling up and down were significant, which is why we are moving to Apache-based services such as Kafka.
The main differences between these two products primarily concern the scale up and scale down capabilities, which are more impacting us. Apart from that, I don't see any issues.
How are customer service and support?
I would rate their support as nine out of ten so far.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We are moving away from it because it has limited options for scaling up and down. The licensing was one of the factors since it was a licensed copy and it cost us whenever we needed to scale up and down. That's where we are moving to Apache-based services such as Kafka.
What other advice do I have?
I work as an integration architect who helps integrate applications, handling data passing to SAP CRM, SaaS-based applications, databases, or Databricks applications. In integration, I am familiar with IBM MQ and Kafka. Regarding IBM MQ, it is IBM Universal Messaging tool, which is similar to what MQ is. I have rated this solution 9 out of 10.
Has faced unexpected VM restarts but continues to deliver messages reliably
What is our primary use case?
I work with both IBM MQ and WebSphere Application Server. I don't want to say I'm an expert at either one of them, but I manage an infrastructure team that has both of these technologies in the infrastructure.
IBM MQ is basically used in applications that are part of the ACE product. It's also used a lot for my clients' workload that comes from B2B, and there are some MQ B2B connections that come in, so we use it for that. The two main uses are for ACE and for B2B from external clients.
What is most valuable?
The best thing about IBM MQ solution is that it's guaranteed delivery and it's fast. Those are the two big advantages.
The transactional integrity of IBM MQ in maintaining data consistency is good. We haven't had any issues in four to five years.
What needs improvement?
I'm not sure if we've utilized IBM MQ's high availability. Our MQ VMs are set up in clusters, and I think our queue managers are set up in pairs. However, I don't know if we actually use any specific high availability features of IBM MQ that are out of the box. We have it architected with high availability because we use F5 load balancers, and everything about our architecture is highly available.
I haven't personally used the management tools with IBM MQ, but we do have them, and our middleware folks leverage them. I can't really comment on them because I don't use them myself. I don't think the management tools help optimize message flows, and I'm not really aware of how they help in this.
I'm not familiar with dynamic routing for IBM MQ.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
The only issue I've had with IBM MQ in the last couple of years is that whenever there is a delta in the CPU consumption of a VM that MQ is housed on, occasionally we get those VMs that power off and power on. I'm not even sure if that's a problem with Linux or a problem with IBM MQ, but that's the only issue we've had with them. Otherwise, they're completely stable.
I would rate the stability of IBM MQ probably a nine or above. It's pretty good.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
IBM MQ scales just fine. We've got 12 VMs running, and it's very easy to scale.
How are customer service and support?
IBM has always been good with technical support, so I would rate them a seven or an eight.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We haven't used any other message queue software before choosing IBM MQ, as it's been our messaging software.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
From what I understand, the pricing or licensing of IBM MQ is a one-time charge and then a yearly license fee. We pay about 6-7K per CPU and probably about 2 to 3K per year for each CPU licensed. It's not cheap.
What other advice do I have?
Everything that we have comes in as TLS, so IBM MQ's encryption doesn't really play in because everything we have that comes in from the outside world is TLS. On a scale of one to ten, I rate IBM MQ an eight.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
MQ is a robust platform for your internal systems
What do you like best about the product?
Robust platform for internal messaging communication.
What do you dislike about the product?
Minimum downsides when working with a strong reliable platform such as MQ
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
It connects different disparate systems with minimum change and least effort.
Great product
What do you like best about the product?
Easy setup.
Reliability, robustness.
Easy to manage.
Reliability, robustness.
Easy to manage.
What do you dislike about the product?
Nothing.
None.
I have not found any disadvantages só dar in the uses we have of IBM MQ
None.
I have not found any disadvantages só dar in the uses we have of IBM MQ
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
We use IBM MQ to communicate with other institutions in SPB
We use the MQ to exchange messagea between the legacy (mainframe) And the low platform.
We use the MQ to exchange messagea between the legacy (mainframe) And the low platform.
Experience with reliability and resilience while knowledge accessibility needs improvement
What is our primary use case?
With IBM MQ, the main use case is for applications in online banking. We use it within the banking industry. IBM MQ is a choice to create a relation between the Mainframe and distributed servers, allowing applications running on Linux or Windows to interface with Mainframe applications and enable more development of easier and open applications in a distributed environment. This means we can develop more applications that are easier to use.
What is most valuable?
I work with CICs, Workload Manager, and DB2 mainly. I have experience with IBM MQ. We mainly use clusters at the Windows level or Linux level, and in the Mainframe, we have multiple paths and different lines of connectivity transmission to assess the impact of IBM MQ's high-availability configurations on our system's resilience.
We use advanced security features such as SSH for encryption and authentication mechanisms. The security features help protect our messaging data by encrypting the transmission and ensuring authentication for connection.
What needs improvement?
The customer service or technical support from IBM is not as good as we expected; it could be better. They don't meet our standards due to the timing to get a person with knowledge.
For how long have I used the solution?
We use some IBM solutions hosted on AWS as a cloud provider.
What was my experience with deployment of the solution?
The initial setup of IBM MQ is reasonable, just as we were expecting, and we were on time for that project.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
The maintenance for IBM MQ is good to be once a year; that's the best.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
We mainly use clusters at the Windows level or Linux level, and in the Mainframe, we have multiple paths and different lines of connectivity transmission to assess the impact of IBM MQ's high-availability configurations on our system's resilience.
How are customer service and support?
The customer service or technical support from IBM is not as good as we expected; it could be better. I rate them a 7 on a scale of 1 to 10. They don't meet our standards due to the timing to get a person with knowledge.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I don't really know the main differences between IBM MQ and other messaging queue solutions because it has been my natural choice, coming from Mainframe z/OS.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup of IBM MQ is reasonable, just as we were expecting, and we were on time for that project.
What about the implementation team?
In the setup, there are mainly two persons involved, but others from different areas are also involved, making it more than just those two.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
I currently work with IBM, but we are also using other vendors such as BMC and Logon for specific backup solutions from Mainframe.
What other advice do I have?
My main experience is with IBM Mainframe. I do not have experience with their IBM QRadar. AWS is not our main cloud provider for IBM solutions. I am not very experienced with cloud, but we do use object storage, which is cloud or on-prem for example.
I don't remember specific examples at this moment, but if you contact me in two days, I will probably be able to refresh my memory as I'm currently focused on the capacity and performance issues of the system. I don't have thoughts on IBM MQ's pricing since I work in the support area and I'm not related to the purchasing process.
My company mainly provides services to the banking area but also sells many products, including IBM and open system solutions, such as storage. My company's name is Telcos, spelled T-A-L-C-O-S.
I am very interested in providing a review for the IBM Workload Automation based on my recent experience with it. I am still working with Workload Automation and probably have a project related to this support, but I have switched to focusing more on performance issues at the moment. I used to be more focused on Workload Automation, but now I have shifted my project to banking application performance and capacity.
I still work with IBM solutions in the other area, maintaining contact with AWS that relates to Workload Automation. I deal with banking services in general performance, mainly related to recovery, backup solutions, and CPU utilization. I have experience with IBM ProtecTIER, specifically the ProtecTIER, and not Tivoli. I do not remember experiencing Spectrum. I do not have experience with Spectrum Protect.
I have experience with backup and recovery, particularly on the Mainframe side, but not with HSM. HSM is more related to the Mainframe, and while I don't have recent experience, my focus has shifted to performance areas in z/OS, especially solutions relating to backups and disaster recovery.
We move data from Mainframe to the cloud. BMC is one of the companies I refer to, along with Logon. Logon is spelled L-O-G-O-N. Logon is based in Israel.
Overall, I would rate IBM MQ an 8 out of 10.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Hybrid Cloud
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
Amazon Web Services (AWS)
Reliable payment processing is achieved with minimal disruption
What is our primary use case?
We use it for payment processing and to send these payments abroad in another country.
We use it for the production environment, and we consider it stable enough, which is why we continue to use this product.
What is most valuable?
The biggest advantage is that it's a reliable enough product which we use, and it's a highly documented product. We can learn it slowly, so we have experienced users and experienced staff to use this product.
We suppose it's secure because we use secure tools within the frame of this product, such as TLS 1.3 and so on. Its scalability is enough for our purposes, and that's all we can say about it.
What needs improvement?
Currently, we have some disadvantages; it's a bit difficult to use IBM ID to access support from the IBM site. To get nice support from IBM, we need to use IBM ID, and it's a bit complicated to integrate it with IBM support.
Support can be better because sometimes we need explanations for some behaviors of the product, and it's not easy to reach the proper person in IBM support.
They could add some new features into IBM MQ to make it better. A graphical user interface in addition to MQ Explorer could be useful, but we are satisfied with MQ Explorer as well.
For how long have I used the solution?
We have been using it in general for about 10 years.
What was my experience with deployment of the solution?
We have some experience with installations, and it's difficult. We need to state that it requires some experience and knowledge. We have required experience, having used this product about 10 years.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Its scalability is enough for our purposes, and that's all we can say about it.
How are customer service and support?
Support can be better because sometimes we need explanations for some behaviors of the product, and it's not easy to reach the proper person in IBM support.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I cannot compare with other products, and I cannot give exact answers regarding whether it's expensive or cheap, as I don't know the costs of other products in this group. For us, we pay for it, and we rely on this product, and it's okay.
How was the initial setup?
It's possible to get some training, but the cost of this learning is expensive. It costs some money, but we have required experience and knowledge because we have been using it for about 10 years.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
It's possible to get some training, but the cost of this learning is expensive. It costs some money, but we have required experience and knowledge because we have been using it for about 10 years.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
I cannot compare with other products, and I cannot give exact answers regarding whether it's expensive or cheap, as I don't know the costs of other products in this group. For us, we pay for it, and we rely on this product, and it's okay.
What other advice do I have?
I'm just a user, representing Raiffeisen Bank, and it's clear.
We use WebSphere MQ, which includes some tools such as ActiveMQ, IBM MQ, and VMware.
Today, we don't use AI for our purposes, but if we find any useful AI features for this product, we might use them later because we can't evaluate their reliability for our needs right now.
On a scale of 1-10, I rate IBM MQ a nine.
Reliable data transfers have been made easier with enhanced security
What is our primary use case?
Primarily used for IBM MQ data transfers.
As a user of IBM MQ, I use it for data transfers, configuring the queues and similar tasks. I do not work with it beyond those functions.
It is primarily used for data transfers within the applications. That encompasses the most critical features and functionality for me.
What is most valuable?
What needs improvement?
IBM MQ is still in a premature state. It is in a research phase, so it is very early to make specific suggestions about improvements.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
The stability of IBM MQ rates at eight or nine out of ten.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
The scalability of IBM MQ rates at eight out of ten.
Scalability and sustainability could be examples for IBM MQ.
Any product of this nature should be scalable and sustainable. It depends on how the product evolves, how it has been implemented in the organization, and how we manage it.
What other advice do I have?
I found the information about IBM MQ on the website to be good.
I am just a user of IBM MQ conducting research and reviewing it.
Being a user of IBM MQ, I do not have detailed knowledge about the specifics. The support team handles those aspects.
We are informed about issues with IBM MQ periodically. However, we do not necessarily receive complete information about why certain things were not working, as it is outside of my purview.
From a sustainability perspective, there might be room for consideration regarding IBM MQ. Otherwise, it performs well.
My final rating for IBM MQ is nine out of ten points, where ten is the best.
showing 1 - 10