EMQX Cloud (Pay as you go)

My main use case for EMQX  is transporting messages via WebSocket and TCP for streaming data, specifically streaming prices on the trading board of VNDIRECT.

For chatbox messaging or data streaming, I use EMQX  as a message broker. When a user sends a message, I use EMQX to send that message to people in my room. With the trading bot, I use EMQX for streaming messages. When I receive a message from Hanoi X and HoSE, I convert the message and send it to the customer who is using a trading bot to monitor price changes.

I use EMQX for my chat platform and message streaming for a trading bot.

The best features EMQX offers in my experience are that it can send messages for a large number of customers with a very high message-per-second rate while consuming low resources. When I use an EMQX cluster with three node cores with four CPUs and eight gigabytes of RAM, and three node replicas with eight CPUs and 16 gigabytes of RAM, I can send outgoing messages up to two million messages per second for all my customers who are online at that time.

EMQX has good performance and sends messages with low latency. When I send a message, the latency is less than 100 milliseconds, which is very improved message latency.

When I changed from a trading bot using WebSocket to EMQX, I was able to cut down costs by half of the resources from before. My service has durability and scalability that is very easy to achieve.

To improve EMQX, I think it should reduce costs, save time when sending messages, and improve reliability.

Regarding needed improvements, I think EMQX should improve setup time. EMQX cluster setup is not easy. Additionally, I think EMQX needs to improve its logs. When I encounter a problem with EMQX error messages, it is very difficult to trace the logs and find the real reason for the error to fix it.

I have been using EMQX for three years.

EMQX is very stable since I have been using it for three years.

EMQX's scalability is very easy to manage.

When performance is high, we only need to add a node replica.

I previously used a different solution before EMQX.

Before EMQX, I used WebSocket. When I changed to EMQX, I found that EMQX is very good for my needs.

I do not purchase EMQX through any cloud marketplace; I download EMQX and set up the free version.

I have seen a return on investment by lowering the resource cost by half.

With my experience of pricing, setup cost, and licensing, I am not buying a license because I am using the free version of EMQX.

Before choosing EMQX, I evaluated other options such as Mosquitto and other MQTT protocol solutions, but I do not remember all the tech stacks I researched, as it was a long time ago.

My advice to others looking into using EMQX is that if anyone wants to use it for their microservices, they can try it. EMQX is very good for new developers who want to use it.

EMQX is a very good solution for a system with high performance and large throughput messaging for clients using mobile or web applications. You can use the WebSocket feature of EMQX with SSL on port 8084. You can also use other features of EMQX such as webhooks. When I used authorization of EMQX, I faced issues regarding high load performance in my service backend. Therefore, anyone wanting to use authorization of EMQX should use Redis  Auth. We changed from webhooks to using Redis  Auth, and we achieved better performance. EMQX is a good solution if one is using authorization. I give this review a rating of eight out of ten.

My main use case for EMQX  is using it as a broker for MQTT. In our projects, we use EMQX  as an MQTT broker because we are an IoT-based company where devices are provisioned or connected to our cloud through MQTT, allowing devices to send data to our services, back-end service, or cloud using an MQTT connection through EMQX.

The best features EMQX offers are that it is highly scalable and cheaper than other brokers, plus we can use our own back-end services integrated to it for authentication and authorization.

I find the integration process with our back-end services for authentication and authorization to be smooth.

EMQX has positively impacted our organization because, as I have already mentioned, it is quite cheaper compared to other enterprise-level brokers we were using, and we find it very easy to maintain and manage, making it quite impactful in our company.

I think EMQX can be improved by providing a uniform UI and login feature that we can use in the dashboard.

Additionally, it seems to be a single tenant setup. If we are using a multi-tenant structure, we cannot use it without deploying EMQX dashboard for each instance, which is hard to track. A centralized dashboard where we can add multiple clusters in a single place would be easier to monitor. We also do not find any OAuth integration such as Google login, which would be quite helpful.

I have been using EMQX for about two to three years.

In my experience, EMQX is pretty stable.

Regarding EMQX's scalability, we have never tested it much, but so far it feels okay from our perspective.

The customer support for EMQX is pretty good and helpful, as we get prompt responses from them.

We previously used AWS  IoT and switched because it was quite expensive for us.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that it is pretty convenient, though I do not handle the licensing or pricing communication, but I think it is pretty convenient.

Our cloud provider is Google Cloud  Platform.

Regarding return on investment, I am not sure about the money perspective, but I heard from my manager that we need one extra engineer to set up things.

We have seen specific outcomes such as cost savings since switching to EMQX, as we are using it for trial purposes and have some licenses based on our usage, meaning we do not need to pay for what we are not using.

Before choosing EMQX, we evaluated other options from AWS  IoT to EMQX.

I would rate the customer support ten out of ten.

My advice for others looking into using EMQX is that if you want to achieve cost savings and you want to deploy on your private infrastructure or in your cloud or cluster, you can do so.

I think EMQX is a great product. I have given this review an overall rating of eight out of ten.

EMQX  is a unified architecture and unified namespace based on MQTT broker, primarily using EMQX  or HiveMQ. We use EMQX for the communication of factory data, sensors, and PLCs.

We track data on sensors and MQTT data by collecting MQTT data for sensors and publishing it to the MQTT broker. We then fetch MQTT data again, calculate some KPIs, and publish these KPIs back to the MQTT broker.

We primarily use energy data for reducing energy costs and calculate the machine state of machines. We use EMQX and MQTT mostly for the machine state of machines. We collect machine data, such as temperature or pressure and sensor values in machines, and then calculate the machine state of the machines or lines. We collect energy data of these machines in energy analyzers and calculate the total energy of the products.

The best features EMQX offers include fast communication; MQTT is the fastest protocol that I have observed.

MQTT scalability is excellent, and I am using the REST protocol. The REST protocol is not scalable as it is an old protocol, but MQTT runs a pub-sub mechanism and it is very fast and very scalable. This is excellent.

MQTT enables us to use unified namespace architecture. I collect data and publish data to MQTT and use this factory data on the MQTT broker. This enables us to have very fast integrations and data integrations, and I see data when I need it very quickly. When I use the MQTT broker, I do not need a database. EMQX broker is unified.

For example, MQTT 5.0 is a new version that is very fast.

EMQX is a good MQTT broker but the historian is simple. The historian side of EMQX and MQTT is simple and could be better.

It could be more reliable in new versions.

I have been working in my current field for three years.

EMQX is very stable in my experience.

EMQX's scalability is excellent and I have used EMQX for very big data and it is a very scalable solution.

When I need any support, I read forums and there are many articles in forums.

We were using a database, for example, MSSQL  or PostgreSQL . In my old experience before MQTT, MQTT is faster than database solutions and more lightweight solutions.

I have seen a return on investment with money saved and time saved because the protocol is MQTT.

EMQX is an open-source protocol. The cost is mostly the cloud provider cost. EMQX is open-source and MQTT is also an open-source protocol, so the cost is less.

I evaluated other options before choosing EMQX.

EMQX is a unified namespace architecture and is a lightweight solution compared to old database solutions such as MSSQL  or PostgreSQL . EMQX is also a very fast communication protocol. MQTT is a very fast communication protocol.

I appreciate EMQX as it is a very lightweight solution. This review has an overall rating of 8.