Comparison of WebSphere Application Server and IBM MQ messaging
If you are not already an established user of either WebSphere® Application Server or IBM MQ, and you are considering whether the service integration platform or IBM MQ better meets your messaging needs, use this table to compare the main features of the two platforms.
Service integration (the default messaging provider for WebSphere Application Server) | IBM MQ |
---|---|
Closely integrated with WebSphere Application Server, and combines well with the Java™ Platform, Enterprise Edition (Java EE) | Can connect to almost any platform, and supports a heterogeneous environment |
Supports multiple languages through XMS clients, and multiple platforms | Supports multiple languages and multiple platforms |
Limited tooling support, other than what is provided in WebSphere Application Server | Has many Independent Software Vendor (ISV) tools |
Provides strong performance for both persistent and non-persistent messages for JMS | Supports JMS and non-JMS messaging interfaces, and provides strong performance for non-JMS applications |
Designed for a maximum message size of about 40 megabytes on a 32-bit operating system (subject to heap usage) | Supports large message sizes up to about 100 megabytes |
Underpins WebSphere Enterprise Service Bus and WebSphere Process Server | Underpins IBM MQ and IBM MQ File Transfer Edition |
Included in a single administrative model for WebSphere Application Server, WebSphere Enterprise Service Bus, and WebSphere Process Server | Can integrate existing infrastructure and applications (for example, CICS®) |
Clustering is integrated with WebSphere Application Server clustering for high availability and scalability | IBM MQ clustering provides selective parallelism of clustered queues |
Note: If your existing or planned messaging environment involves
both IBM MQ and WebSphere Application Server systems, the messaging
platform that you choose for a given task does not necessarily determine
which JMS messaging provider you should use. For more information,
see Choosing messaging providers for a mixed environment.