Alternatives to MassTransit logo

Alternatives to MassTransit

RabbitMQ, NServiceBus, Azure Service Bus, Kafka, and Hangfire are the most popular alternatives and competitors to MassTransit.
86
170
+ 1
0

What is MassTransit and what are its top alternatives?

It is free software/open-source .NET-based Enterprise Service Bus software that helps Microsoft developers route messages over MSMQ, RabbitMQ, TIBCO and ActiveMQ service busses, with native support for MSMQ and RabbitMQ.
MassTransit is a tool in the Message Queue category of a tech stack.
MassTransit is an open source tool with GitHub stars and GitHub forks. Here’s a link to MassTransit's open source repository on GitHub

Top Alternatives to MassTransit

  • RabbitMQ
    RabbitMQ

    RabbitMQ gives your applications a common platform to send and receive messages, and your messages a safe place to live until received. ...

  • NServiceBus
    NServiceBus

    Performance, scalability, pub/sub, reliable integration, workflow orchestration, and everything else you could possibly want in a service bus. ...

  • Azure Service Bus
    Azure Service Bus

    It is a cloud messaging system for connecting apps and devices across public and private clouds. You can depend on it when you need highly-reliable cloud messaging service between applications and services, even when one or more is offline. ...

  • Kafka
    Kafka

    Kafka is a distributed, partitioned, replicated commit log service. It provides the functionality of a messaging system, but with a unique design. ...

  • Hangfire
    Hangfire

    It is an open-source framework that helps you to create, process and manage your background jobs, i.e. operations you don't want to put in your request processing pipeline. It supports all kind of background tasks – short-running and long-running, CPU intensive and I/O intensive, one shot and recurrent. ...

  • Amazon SQS
    Amazon SQS

    Transmit any volume of data, at any level of throughput, without losing messages or requiring other services to be always available. With SQS, you can offload the administrative burden of operating and scaling a highly available messaging cluster, while paying a low price for only what you use. ...

  • Celery
    Celery

    Celery is an asynchronous task queue/job queue based on distributed message passing. It is focused on real-time operation, but supports scheduling as well. ...

  • ActiveMQ
    ActiveMQ

    Apache ActiveMQ is fast, supports many Cross Language Clients and Protocols, comes with easy to use Enterprise Integration Patterns and many advanced features while fully supporting JMS 1.1 and J2EE 1.4. Apache ActiveMQ is released under the Apache 2.0 License. ...

MassTransit alternatives & related posts

RabbitMQ logo

RabbitMQ

20.8K
18.4K
527
Open source multiprotocol messaging broker
20.8K
18.4K
+ 1
527
PROS OF RABBITMQ
  • 234
    It's fast and it works with good metrics/monitoring
  • 79
    Ease of configuration
  • 59
    I like the admin interface
  • 50
    Easy to set-up and start with
  • 21
    Durable
  • 18
    Intuitive work through python
  • 18
    Standard protocols
  • 10
    Written primarily in Erlang
  • 8
    Simply superb
  • 6
    Completeness of messaging patterns
  • 3
    Scales to 1 million messages per second
  • 3
    Reliable
  • 2
    Distributed
  • 2
    Supports MQTT
  • 2
    Better than most traditional queue based message broker
  • 2
    Supports AMQP
  • 1
    Clusterable
  • 1
    Clear documentation with different scripting language
  • 1
    Great ui
  • 1
    Inubit Integration
  • 1
    Better routing system
  • 1
    High performance
  • 1
    Runs on Open Telecom Platform
  • 1
    Delayed messages
  • 1
    Reliability
  • 1
    Open-source
CONS OF RABBITMQ
  • 9
    Too complicated cluster/HA config and management
  • 6
    Needs Erlang runtime. Need ops good with Erlang runtime
  • 5
    Configuration must be done first, not by your code
  • 4
    Slow

related RabbitMQ posts

James Cunningham
Operations Engineer at Sentry · | 18 upvotes · 1.7M views
Shared insights
on
CeleryCeleryRabbitMQRabbitMQ
at

As Sentry runs throughout the day, there are about 50 different offline tasks that we execute—anything from “process this event, pretty please” to “send all of these cool people some emails.” There are some that we execute once a day and some that execute thousands per second.

Managing this variety requires a reliably high-throughput message-passing technology. We use Celery's RabbitMQ implementation, and we stumbled upon a great feature called Federation that allows us to partition our task queue across any number of RabbitMQ servers and gives us the confidence that, if any single server gets backlogged, others will pitch in and distribute some of the backlogged tasks to their consumers.

#MessageQueue

See more

Around the time of their Series A, Pinterest’s stack included Python and Django, with Tornado and Node.js as web servers. Memcached / Membase and Redis handled caching, with RabbitMQ handling queueing. Nginx, HAproxy and Varnish managed static-delivery and load-balancing, with persistent data storage handled by MySQL.

See more
NServiceBus logo

NServiceBus

56
129
2
Enterprise-grade scalability and reliability for your workflows and integrations
56
129
+ 1
2
PROS OF NSERVICEBUS
  • 1
    Not as good as alternatives, good job security
  • 1
    Brings on-prem issues to the cloud
CONS OF NSERVICEBUS
    Be the first to leave a con

    related NServiceBus posts

    Azure Service Bus logo

    Azure Service Bus

    269
    526
    7
    Reliable cloud messaging as a service (MaaS)
    269
    526
    + 1
    7
    PROS OF AZURE SERVICE BUS
    • 4
      Easy Integration with .Net
    • 2
      Cloud Native
    • 1
      Use while high messaging need
    CONS OF AZURE SERVICE BUS
    • 1
      Limited features in Basic tier
    • 1
      Skills can only be used in Azure - vendor lock-in
    • 1
      Lacking in JMS support
    • 1
      Observability of messages in the queue is lacking

    related Azure Service Bus posts

    Shared insights
    on
    Azure Service BusAzure Service BusIBM MQIBM MQ

    Want to get the differences in features and enhancement, pros and cons, and also how to Migrate from IBM MQ to Azure Service Bus.

    See more
    Kafka logo

    Kafka

    23K
    21.6K
    607
    Distributed, fault tolerant, high throughput pub-sub messaging system
    23K
    21.6K
    + 1
    607
    PROS OF KAFKA
    • 126
      High-throughput
    • 119
      Distributed
    • 92
      Scalable
    • 86
      High-Performance
    • 66
      Durable
    • 38
      Publish-Subscribe
    • 19
      Simple-to-use
    • 18
      Open source
    • 12
      Written in Scala and java. Runs on JVM
    • 9
      Message broker + Streaming system
    • 4
      KSQL
    • 4
      Avro schema integration
    • 4
      Robust
    • 3
      Suport Multiple clients
    • 2
      Extremely good parallelism constructs
    • 2
      Partioned, replayable log
    • 1
      Simple publisher / multi-subscriber model
    • 1
      Fun
    • 1
      Flexible
    CONS OF KAFKA
    • 32
      Non-Java clients are second-class citizens
    • 29
      Needs Zookeeper
    • 9
      Operational difficulties
    • 5
      Terrible Packaging

    related Kafka posts

    Eric Colson
    Chief Algorithms Officer at Stitch Fix · | 21 upvotes · 6.1M views

    The algorithms and data infrastructure at Stitch Fix is housed in #AWS. Data acquisition is split between events flowing through Kafka, and periodic snapshots of PostgreSQL DBs. We store data in an Amazon S3 based data warehouse. Apache Spark on Yarn is our tool of choice for data movement and #ETL. Because our storage layer (s3) is decoupled from our processing layer, we are able to scale our compute environment very elastically. We have several semi-permanent, autoscaling Yarn clusters running to serve our data processing needs. While the bulk of our compute infrastructure is dedicated to algorithmic processing, we also implemented Presto for adhoc queries and dashboards.

    Beyond data movement and ETL, most #ML centric jobs (e.g. model training and execution) run in a similarly elastic environment as containers running Python and R code on Amazon EC2 Container Service clusters. The execution of batch jobs on top of ECS is managed by Flotilla, a service we built in house and open sourced (see https://github.com/stitchfix/flotilla-os).

    At Stitch Fix, algorithmic integrations are pervasive across the business. We have dozens of data products actively integrated systems. That requires serving layer that is robust, agile, flexible, and allows for self-service. Models produced on Flotilla are packaged for deployment in production using Khan, another framework we've developed internally. Khan provides our data scientists the ability to quickly productionize those models they've developed with open source frameworks in Python 3 (e.g. PyTorch, sklearn), by automatically packaging them as Docker containers and deploying to Amazon ECS. This provides our data scientist a one-click method of getting from their algorithms to production. We then integrate those deployments into a service mesh, which allows us to A/B test various implementations in our product.

    For more info:

    #DataScience #DataStack #Data

    See more
    John Kodumal

    As we've evolved or added additional infrastructure to our stack, we've biased towards managed services. Most new backing stores are Amazon RDS instances now. We do use self-managed PostgreSQL with TimescaleDB for time-series data—this is made HA with the use of Patroni and Consul.

    We also use managed Amazon ElastiCache instances instead of spinning up Amazon EC2 instances to run Redis workloads, as well as shifting to Amazon Kinesis instead of Kafka.

    See more
    Hangfire logo

    Hangfire

    167
    244
    17
    Perform background processing in .NET and .NET Core applications
    167
    244
    + 1
    17
    PROS OF HANGFIRE
    • 7
      Integrated UI dashboard
    • 5
      Simple
    • 3
      Robust
    • 2
      In Memory
    • 0
      Simole
    CONS OF HANGFIRE
      Be the first to leave a con

      related Hangfire posts

      Amazon SQS logo

      Amazon SQS

      2.2K
      2K
      171
      Fully managed message queuing service
      2.2K
      2K
      + 1
      171
      PROS OF AMAZON SQS
      • 62
        Easy to use, reliable
      • 40
        Low cost
      • 28
        Simple
      • 14
        Doesn't need to maintain it
      • 8
        It is Serverless
      • 4
        Has a max message size (currently 256K)
      • 3
        Triggers Lambda
      • 3
        Easy to configure with Terraform
      • 3
        Delayed delivery upto 15 mins only
      • 3
        Delayed delivery upto 12 hours
      • 1
        JMS compliant
      • 1
        Support for retry and dead letter queue
      • 1
        D
      CONS OF AMAZON SQS
      • 2
        Has a max message size (currently 256K)
      • 2
        Proprietary
      • 2
        Difficult to configure
      • 1
        Has a maximum 15 minutes of delayed messages only

      related Amazon SQS posts

      Praveen Mooli
      Engineering Manager at Taylor and Francis · | 18 upvotes · 3.8M views

      We are in the process of building a modern content platform to deliver our content through various channels. We decided to go with Microservices architecture as we wanted scale. Microservice architecture style is an approach to developing an application as a suite of small independently deployable services built around specific business capabilities. You can gain modularity, extensive parallelism and cost-effective scaling by deploying services across many distributed servers. Microservices modularity facilitates independent updates/deployments, and helps to avoid single point of failure, which can help prevent large-scale outages. We also decided to use Event Driven Architecture pattern which is a popular distributed asynchronous architecture pattern used to produce highly scalable applications. The event-driven architecture is made up of highly decoupled, single-purpose event processing components that asynchronously receive and process events.

      To build our #Backend capabilities we decided to use the following: 1. #Microservices - Java with Spring Boot , Node.js with ExpressJS and Python with Flask 2. #Eventsourcingframework - Amazon Kinesis , Amazon Kinesis Firehose , Amazon SNS , Amazon SQS, AWS Lambda 3. #Data - Amazon RDS , Amazon DynamoDB , Amazon S3 , MongoDB Atlas

      To build #Webapps we decided to use Angular 2 with RxJS

      #Devops - GitHub , Travis CI , Terraform , Docker , Serverless

      See more
      Tim Specht
      ‎Co-Founder and CTO at Dubsmash · | 14 upvotes · 938.4K views

      In order to accurately measure & track user behaviour on our platform we moved over quickly from the initial solution using Google Analytics to a custom-built one due to resource & pricing concerns we had.

      While this does sound complicated, it’s as easy as clients sending JSON blobs of events to Amazon Kinesis from where we use AWS Lambda & Amazon SQS to batch and process incoming events and then ingest them into Google BigQuery. Once events are stored in BigQuery (which usually only takes a second from the time the client sends the data until it’s available), we can use almost-standard-SQL to simply query for data while Google makes sure that, even with terabytes of data being scanned, query times stay in the range of seconds rather than hours. Before ingesting their data into the pipeline, our mobile clients are aggregating events internally and, once a certain threshold is reached or the app is going to the background, sending the events as a JSON blob into the stream.

      In the past we had workers running that continuously read from the stream and would validate and post-process the data and then enqueue them for other workers to write them to BigQuery. We went ahead and implemented the Lambda-based approach in such a way that Lambda functions would automatically be triggered for incoming records, pre-aggregate events, and write them back to SQS, from which we then read them, and persist the events to BigQuery. While this approach had a couple of bumps on the road, like re-triggering functions asynchronously to keep up with the stream and proper batch sizes, we finally managed to get it running in a reliable way and are very happy with this solution today.

      #ServerlessTaskProcessing #GeneralAnalytics #RealTimeDataProcessing #BigDataAsAService

      See more
      Celery logo

      Celery

      1.6K
      1.6K
      280
      Distributed task queue
      1.6K
      1.6K
      + 1
      280
      PROS OF CELERY
      • 99
        Task queue
      • 63
        Python integration
      • 40
        Django integration
      • 30
        Scheduled Task
      • 19
        Publish/subsribe
      • 8
        Various backend broker
      • 6
        Easy to use
      • 5
        Great community
      • 5
        Workflow
      • 4
        Free
      • 1
        Dynamic
      CONS OF CELERY
      • 4
        Sometimes loses tasks
      • 1
        Depends on broker

      related Celery posts

      James Cunningham
      Operations Engineer at Sentry · | 18 upvotes · 1.7M views
      Shared insights
      on
      CeleryCeleryRabbitMQRabbitMQ
      at

      As Sentry runs throughout the day, there are about 50 different offline tasks that we execute—anything from “process this event, pretty please” to “send all of these cool people some emails.” There are some that we execute once a day and some that execute thousands per second.

      Managing this variety requires a reliably high-throughput message-passing technology. We use Celery's RabbitMQ implementation, and we stumbled upon a great feature called Federation that allows us to partition our task queue across any number of RabbitMQ servers and gives us the confidence that, if any single server gets backlogged, others will pitch in and distribute some of the backlogged tasks to their consumers.

      #MessageQueue

      See more
      Michael Mota

      Automations are what makes a CRM powerful. With Celery and RabbitMQ we've been able to make powerful automations that truly works for our clients. Such as for example, automatic daily reports, reminders for their activities, important notifications regarding their client activities and actions on the website and more.

      We use Celery basically for everything that needs to be scheduled for the future, and using RabbitMQ as our Queue-broker is amazing since it fully integrates with Django and Celery storing on our database results of the tasks done so we can see if anything fails immediately.

      See more
      ActiveMQ logo

      ActiveMQ

      607
      1.3K
      77
      A message broker written in Java together with a full JMS client
      607
      1.3K
      + 1
      77
      PROS OF ACTIVEMQ
      • 18
        Easy to use
      • 14
        Open source
      • 13
        Efficient
      • 10
        JMS compliant
      • 6
        High Availability
      • 5
        Scalable
      • 3
        Distributed Network of brokers
      • 3
        Persistence
      • 3
        Support XA (distributed transactions)
      • 1
        Docker delievery
      • 1
        Highly configurable
      • 0
        RabbitMQ
      CONS OF ACTIVEMQ
      • 1
        ONLY Vertically Scalable
      • 1
        Support
      • 1
        Low resilience to exceptions and interruptions
      • 1
        Difficult to scale

      related ActiveMQ posts

      I want to choose Message Queue with the following features - Highly Available, Distributed, Scalable, Monitoring. I have RabbitMQ, ActiveMQ, Kafka and Apache RocketMQ in mind. But I am confused which one to choose.

      See more
      Naushad Warsi
      software developer at klingelnberg · | 1 upvote · 777.8K views
      Shared insights
      on
      ActiveMQActiveMQRabbitMQRabbitMQ

      I use ActiveMQ because RabbitMQ have stopped giving the support for AMQP 1.0 or above version and the earlier version of AMQP doesn't give the functionality to support OAuth.

      If OAuth is not required and we can go with AMQP 0.9 then i still recommend rabbitMq.

      See more