Google Cloud Pub/Sub vs. RabbitMQ

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Google Cloud Pub/Sub
Score 9.1 out of 10
N/A
Google offers Cloud Pub/Sub, a managed message oriented middleware supporting many-to-many asynchronous messaging between applications.N/A
RabbitMQ
Score 8.3 out of 10
N/A
RabbitMQ, an open source message broker, is part of Pivotal Software, a VMware company acquired in 2019, and supports message queue, multiple messaging protocols, and more. RabbitMQ is available open source, however VMware also offers a range of commercial services for RabbitMQ; these are available as part of the Pivotal App Suite.N/A
Pricing
Google Cloud Pub/SubRabbitMQ
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Google Cloud Pub/SubRabbitMQ
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details——
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Google Cloud Pub/SubRabbitMQ
Considered Both Products
Google Cloud Pub/Sub
Chose Google Cloud Pub/Sub
We considered several messaging platforms including Kafka and Kinesis but both would have required more developer work and didn't integrate as nicely with our ecosystem. RabbitMQ is another messaging platform I've researched and prototyped on; it also would have required more …
Chose Google Cloud Pub/Sub
Having used Amazon Web Services SNS & SQS I can say that even if the latter may offer more features, Google Cloud Pub/Sub is easier to use. On the other hand, usage of SNS & SQS as well as documentation and troubleshooting is easier with the AWS solution.
Since we are not using …
RabbitMQ

No answer on this topic

Top Pros
Top Cons
Best Alternatives
Google Cloud Pub/SubRabbitMQ
Small Businesses
Amazon SNS
Amazon SNS
Score 8.4 out of 10

No answers on this topic

Medium-sized Companies
Apache Kafka
Apache Kafka
Score 8.4 out of 10
Apache Kafka
Apache Kafka
Score 8.4 out of 10
Enterprises
Apache Kafka
Apache Kafka
Score 8.4 out of 10
Apache Kafka
Apache Kafka
Score 8.4 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Google Cloud Pub/SubRabbitMQ
Likelihood to Recommend
9.4
(7 ratings)
9.4
(11 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
10.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
10.0
(2 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
Availability
10.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Performance
10.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
9.8
(3 ratings)
6.5
(4 ratings)
Configurability
10.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Product Scalability
10.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Google Cloud Pub/SubRabbitMQ
Likelihood to Recommend
Google
If you want to stream high volumes of data, be it for ETL streaming or event sourcing, Google Cloud Pub/Sub is your go-to tool. It's easy to learn, easy to observe its metrics and scales with ease without additional configuration so if you have more producers of consumers, all you need to do is to deploy on k8s your solutions so that you can perform autoscaling on your pods to adjust to the data volume. The DLQ is also very transparent and easy to configure. Your code will have no logic whatsoever regarding orchestrating pubsub, you just plug and play. However, if you are not in the Google Cloud Pub/Sub environment, you might have trouble or be most likely unable to use it since I think it's a product of Google Cloud.
Read full review
Open Source
It is highly recommended that if you have microservices architecture and if you want to solve 2 phase commit issue, you should use RabbitMQ for communication between microservices. It is a quick and reliable mode of communication between microservices. It is also helpful if you want to implement a job and worker mechanism. You can push the jobs into RabbitMQ and that will be sent to the consumer. It is highly reliable so you won't miss any jobs and you can also implement a retry of jobs with the dead letter queue feature. It will be also helpful in time-consuming API. You can put time-consuming items into a queue so they will be processed later and your API will be quick.
Read full review
Pros
Google
  • With a pub/sub architecture the consumer is decoupled in time from the publisher i.e. if the consumer goes down, it can replay any events that occurred during its downtime.
  • It also allows consumer to throttle and batch incoming data providing much needed flexibility while working with multiple types of data sources
  • A simple and easy to use UI on cloud console for setup and debugging
  • It enables event-driven architectures and asynchronous parallel processing, while improving performance, reliability and scalability
Read full review
Open Source
  • What RabbitMQ does well is what it's advertised to do. It is good at providing lots of high volume, high availability queue. We've seen it handle upwards of 10 million messages in its queues, spread out over 200 queues before its publish/consume rates dipped. So yeah, it can definitely handle a lot of messages and a lot of queues. Depending on the size of the machine RabbitMQ is running on, I'm sure it can handle more.
  • Decent number of plugins! Want a plugin that gives you an interface to view all the queues and see their publish/consume rates? Yes, there's one for that. Want a plugin to "shovel" messages from one queue to another in an emergency? Check. Want a plugin that does extra logging for all the messages received? Got you covered!
  • Lots of configuration possibilities. We've tuned over 100 settings over the past year to get the performance and reliability just right. This could be a downside though--it's pretty confusing and some settings were hard to understand.
Read full review
Cons
Google
  • Would be nice if the queue could be extended beyond 7 days.
  • We found it a bit tricky replay unacknowledged messages when needed.
Read full review
Open Source
  • It breaks communication if we don't acknowledge early. In some cases our work items are time consuming that will take a time and in that scenario we are getting errors that RabbitMQ broke the channel. It will be good if RabbitMQ provides two acknowledgements, one is for that it has been received at client side and second ack is client is completed the processing part.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Google
It serves all of our purposes in the most transparent way I can imagine, after seeing other message queueing providers, I can only attest to its quality.
Read full review
Open Source
No answers on this topic
Usability
Google
It has many libraries in many languages, google provides either good guides or they're AI generated code libraries that are easy to understand. It has very good observability too.
Read full review
Open Source
RabbitMQ is very usable if you are a programmer or DevOps engineer. You can setup and configure a messaging system without any programmatic knowledge either through an admin console plugin or through a command-line interface. It's very easy to spin up additional consumers when volume is heavy and it's very easy to manage those consumers either through automated scripting or through their admin console. Because it's language agnostic it integrates with any system supporting AMQP.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
Google
I have never faced a single problem in 4 years.
Read full review
Open Source
No answers on this topic
Performance
Google
It's very fast, can be even better if you use protobuf.
Read full review
Open Source
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
Google
They have decent documentation, but you need to pay for support. We weren't able to answer all our questions with the documentation and didn't have time to setup support before we needed it so I can't give it a higher rating but I think it tends to be a bit slow unless you're a GCP enterprise support customer.
Read full review
Open Source
RabbitMQ is more software than service so there's no real customer service to speak of unless you go with a provider such as CloudAMQP. So I'll just speak on CloudAMQP. Their customer support is only okay: they only do it over email. They frequently gloss over our support tickets and half answer them without delving deeply or investigating our issues. Their response times are pretty reasonable though.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Google
Having used Amazon Web Services SNS & SQS I can say that even if the latter may offer more features, Google Cloud Pub/Sub is easier to use. On the other hand, usage of SNS & SQS as well as documentation and troubleshooting is easier with the AWS solution. Since we are not using GCP only for Pub/Sub the choice depends on other variables.
Read full review
Open Source
RabbitMQ has a few advantages over Azure Service Bus 1) RMQ handles substantially larger files - ASB tops out at 100MB, we use RabbitMQfor files over 200MB 2) RabbitMQ can be easily setup on prem - Azure Service Bus is cloud only 3) RabbitMQ exchanges are easier to configure over ASB subscriptions ASB has a few advantages too 1) Cloud based - just a few mouse clicks and you're up and running
Read full review
Scalability
Google
You can just plug in consumers at will and it will respond, there's no need for further configuration or introducing new concepts. You have a queue, if it's slow, you plug in more consumers to process more messages: simple as that.
Read full review
Open Source
No answers on this topic
Return on Investment
Google
  • Increased Efficiency with reliable and Google managed services up all the time wit Disaster Recovery in place as well
  • Definitely Lower costs being a cloud based solution and easier to setup
  • Faster Project delivery and go to market plan for the business use cases basis this technology at the back end
Read full review
Open Source
  • Earlier we had a problem with missing work items with our own implementation but later using RabbitMQ is solved a problem. Now our job processing mechanism is highly reliable.
  • We also had a problem with scaling, processing 1k work items per second. RabbitMQ helped us to scale well with increasing work items.
Read full review
ScreenShots