Amazon Simple Queue Service (SQS) vs. Software AG Universal Messaging

While we use AmazonSimple Queue Service (SQS) in our serverless applications, it would be a great option to handle queue management for any internet-connect application. It provides the most benefit in situations where your application or service must maintain mission-critical queue of messages or jobs. If you're already using other AWS services you will find the greatest benefit.

Incentivized

Software AG Universal Messaging is best used in conjunction with Software AG webMethods integration platform, as it works seamlessly with other components of that platform such as webMethods Integration Server and webMethods Trading Networks. It can be used with any messaging client developed in Java or .NET and supports JMS clients, however, it is best suited to being used as one component in an organization that is going to implement the entire webMethods platform to implement their Enterprise Service Bus integration solution.

Incentivized

• SQS is reliable and fully managed. Our engineers do not have to worry about running RabbitMQ.
• SQS is very inexpensive.
• SQS allows data to be encrypted in transit, which may be required for compliance in some products.
• FIFO queues provide exactly-once processing.

Incentivized

• Low latency high performance messaging and event handling
• High availability
• Horizontal scalability
• Seamless integration with Software AG webMethods integration platform

Incentivized

• More frequest polling will be expensive
• No detailed monitoring of queues, just current data and regular monitoring is present
• No way to fetch messages back from the queue

• Logging
• Administration
• Observability

Incentivized

Online blogging and documentation for SQS is great. There are many examples of implementing it and if you look hard enough, more than likely there are examples that meet the exact case with which you are working

Incentivized

To be blunt: Amazon SQS was the simplest to implement given our requirements. Other services in this space work just as well, and SQS does not have any benefits outside of being the easiest to implement when using an otherwise fully AWS stack. AWS itself even has other solutions that would work just as well, however, SQS had the most reasonable pricing model for our given situation. That will certainly not always be the case, but in several of the instances where we are using it, it just made the most sense.

Incentivized

Software AG Universal Messaging has excellent performance characteristics, a good high availability story, and works great when you are using the other products in the Software AG webMethods integration platform, as our organization is. It has relatively high licensing costs, which is a large negative when compared with open-source solutions such as Apache Kafka. However, Software AG provides good support services, and is a market leader in the integration space, giving some surety for risk-averse organizations that if something goes wrong we have a vendor we can rely on to help fix it.

Incentivized

• Under the AWS Echo system, it provides great operating power to the application.
• The cost is much less for messages, and it also supports a multi-user option.
• Not for us, but for a larger organization, low throughput might become an issue for a standard queue type.

Incentivized

• Enables disparate software systems to be integrated, reducing manual data entry
• Enables high performance event handling for data lakes and analytics
• Has relatively high licensing costs

Incentivized