Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Amazon SQS vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 27, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Amazon SQS
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
3rd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
VMware Tanzu Data Solutions
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
83
Ranking in other categories
Database Development and Management (7th), Relational Databases Tools (11th), Data Warehouse (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category, the mindshare of Amazon SQS is 8.5%, down from 11.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of VMware Tanzu Data Solutions is 5.2%, down from 12.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Message Queue (MQ) Software
 

Featured Reviews

Ariel Tarayants - PeerSpot reviewer
Powerful queue system facilitates seamless asynchronous operations
A feature I would like to see in Amazon SQS is the ability to view the content of messages without removing them from the queue. Enhanced filtering on the messages would be beneficial, as currently one has to pull all messages out, filter the right one by code, and then re-insert the remaining messages. This solution is not effective with the FIFO queue.
Sushma Polavarapu - PeerSpot reviewer
Create essential reporting scripts with simplicity but has some operational challenges
We mainly create functions and scripts required for reporting The product is not complex; I do not have to create stored procedures, functions, or views. It's just simple to use. There is general room for improvement. I have been using it for five years. I have faced stability issues, mainly…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"I like how we can subscribe to multiple topics in Amazon SQS. It's also much simpler and quicker to set up than other solutions. It also supports patterns like Kafka and RapidMQ's fan-out pattern but with easier implementation."
"We use the tool in interface integrations."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to decouple components."
"With SQS, we can trigger events in various cloud environments. It offers numerous benefits for us."
"I appreciate that Amazon SQS is fully integrated with Amazon and can be accessed through normal functions or serverless functions, making it very user-friendly. Additionally, the features are comparable to those of other solutions."
"One of the most valuable features of Amazon SQS is its event-driven invocation."
"Amazon SQS is reliable, with no issues to date."
"We use SNS as the publisher, and our procurement service subscribes to those events using SQS. In the past, we relied on time-based or batch-based processes to send data between services on-premises. With SQS, we can trigger actions based on real-time changes in business processes, improving reliability."
"The security is great."
"Pivotal Greenplum's shared-nothing architecture."
"The stability of this solution was very good."
"A very good, open-source platform."
"We use VMware RabbitMQ to transfer information from one point to another."
"Helps us to achieve large-scale analytics."
"The most valuable feature for us is horizontal scaling."
"The solution can scale."
 

Cons

"It would be easier to have a dashboard that allows us to see everything and manage everything since we have so many queues."
"I do not think that this solution is easy to use and the documentation of this solution has a lot of problems and can be improved in the next release. Most of the time, the images in the document are from older versions."
"Amazon SQS is costly. I think there could be improvements in how it facilitates comparisons between different AWS products. A calculator would be helpful. The calculator for Kafka is based on factors like throughput or storage used in the last month. In contrast, the calculator for Amazon SQS is based on the number of transactions processed. These different approaches make it challenging to compare them directly. I suggest AWS provide a straightforward calculator where I can input one aspect, and it calculates costs for multiple solutions."
"Support could be improved."
"Be cautious around pay-as-you-use licensing as costs can become expensive."
"A primary area of improvement for Amazon SQS is the message size limitation, which is currently restricted to 256 kilobytes per message."
"The current visibility timeout of five minutes is okay. However, I'd like to explore the possibility of extending it for specific use cases."
"There could be improvements in the UI for security and scalability."
"The product has to improve the crisis management, especially in memory issues."
"Implementing a circuit breaker scenario using RabbitMQ is complicated. This complexity arises because manual intervention is required to manage worker details and handle operations based on worker IP addresses."
"VMware RabbitMQ's configuration process could be easier to understand."
"Implementation takes a long time."
"I was struggling with installing a few things. It would be good if was somewhat similar to RedHat. There should be more documentation regarding installation troubleshooting."
"Maintenance is time-consuming."
"Other tools besides RabbitMQ provide good TPS and HA."
"Initial setup is a little complex. It took around two weeks to deploy."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Compared to EC2 and other services, Amazon SQS' pricing is cheaper."
"It's quite expensive."
"I rate the tool's pricing a nine out of ten."
"Amazon SQS is more affordable compared to other solutions."
"SQS's pricing is very good - I would rate it nine out of ten."
"The pricing model is pay-as-you-use. It depends on your usage and configuration."
"Amazon SQS offers a generous free tier, beyond which it remains very cost-effective. The cost per million messages is less than a dollar, making it an economical choice."
"Compared to the other options and based on what I have heard, Amazon SQS is relatively more expensive, but it is not insanely expensive."
"It is an open-source platform. Although, we have to pay for additional features."
"It’s an open-source solution."
"It is the best product with best fit for price/performance customer objectives."
"The pricing is okay."
"Pricing is good compared to other products. It's fine."
"are using the open-source version, which can be used free of cost."
"The pricing for RabbitMQ is reasonable. It is worth the cost."
"The solution's pricing is cost-effective as it does not involve significant expenses. Licensing is required only for the server, while clients do not need any licensing. Therefore, it proves to be a cost-efficient option."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.
842,767 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
27%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Healthcare Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Amazon SQS?
AWS provides another messaging service, which is fine for certain purposes. SQS meets the cloud messaging workload requirements. However, combining the features of both products could be an easier ...
What is your primary use case for Amazon SQS?
I primarily use SQL Server for messaging services, and I need to offer loose couplings. SQS is handy for offloading non-urgent tasks that can be reverted later. I use it as a queue management servi...
How does IBM MQ compare with VMware RabbitMQ?
IBM MQ has a great reputation behind it, and this solution is very robust with great stability. It is easy to use, simple to configure and integrates well with our enterprise ecosystem and protocol...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for VMware Tanzu Greenplum?
It’s an open-source solution. There are no expenses for using it.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Greenplum, Pivotal Greenplum, VMware RabbitMQ, VMware Tanzu GemFire, VMware Postgres
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

EMS, NASA, BMW, Capital One
General Electric, Conversant, China CITIC Bank, Aridhia, Purdue University
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon SQS vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
842,767 professionals have used our research since 2012.