编辑:我最初的回答非常关注AMQP。我决定重写它，以提供一个更广泛的观点关于这个主题。

这3种消息传递技术在构建分布式系统方面有不同的方法:

RabbitMQ is one of the leading implementation of the AMQP protocol (along with Apache Qpid). Therefore, it implements a broker architecture, meaning that messages are queued on a central node before being sent to clients. This approach makes RabbitMQ very easy to use and deploy, because advanced scenarios like routing, load balancing or persistent message queuing are supported in just a few lines of code. However, it also makes it less scalable and “slower” because the central node adds latency and message envelopes are quite big.

ZeroMq is a very lightweight messaging system specially designed for high throughput/low latency scenarios like the one you can find in the financial world. Zmq supports many advanced messaging scenarios but contrary to RabbitMQ, you’ll have to implement most of them yourself by combining various pieces of the framework (e.g : sockets and devices). Zmq is very flexible but you’ll have to study the 80 pages or so of the guide (which I recommend reading for anybody writing distributed system, even if you don’t use Zmq) before being able to do anything more complicated than sending messages between 2 peers.

ActiveMQ处于中间地带。与Zmq一样，它可以与代理和P2P拓扑一起部署。像RabbitMQ一样，它更容易实现高级场景，但通常是以牺牲原始性能为代价的。这是信息传递的瑞士军刀:-)。

最后，全部3个产品:

为最常见的语言(c++， Java， .Net, Python, Php, Ruby，…)提供客户端api 有强有力的文档 得到积极支持

编辑:我最初的回答非常关注AMQP。我决定重写它，以提供一个更广泛的观点关于这个主题。

这3种消息传递技术在构建分布式系统方面有不同的方法:

RabbitMQ is one of the leading implementation of the AMQP protocol (along with Apache Qpid). Therefore, it implements a broker architecture, meaning that messages are queued on a central node before being sent to clients. This approach makes RabbitMQ very easy to use and deploy, because advanced scenarios like routing, load balancing or persistent message queuing are supported in just a few lines of code. However, it also makes it less scalable and “slower” because the central node adds latency and message envelopes are quite big.

ZeroMq is a very lightweight messaging system specially designed for high throughput/low latency scenarios like the one you can find in the financial world. Zmq supports many advanced messaging scenarios but contrary to RabbitMQ, you’ll have to implement most of them yourself by combining various pieces of the framework (e.g : sockets and devices). Zmq is very flexible but you’ll have to study the 80 pages or so of the guide (which I recommend reading for anybody writing distributed system, even if you don’t use Zmq) before being able to do anything more complicated than sending messages between 2 peers.

ActiveMQ处于中间地带。与Zmq一样，它可以与代理和P2P拓扑一起部署。像RabbitMQ一样，它更容易实现高级场景，但通常是以牺牲原始性能为代价的。这是信息传递的瑞士军刀:-)。

最后，全部3个产品:

为最常见的语言(c++， Java， .Net, Python, Php, Ruby，…)提供客户端api 有强有力的文档 得到积极支持

在这篇博文的评论中有一些关于Twitter编写他们自己的消息队列的讨论，这可能会很有趣。

史蒂夫承受了很大的负荷和压力 ActiveMQ, RabbitMQ等的测试。 ActiveMQ实际上相当慢(非常慢) 比Kestrel慢)，RabbitMQ 总是因为太多而崩溃 生产者和太少的消费者。

你可能不会有像twitter一样的初始加载:)

比你想知道的更多的信息:

http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Message_Queue_Evaluation_Notes

更新

只是在详细说明保罗在评论中补充的内容。上面提到的页面在2010年之后就消失了，所以阅读时要有所保留。3年里很多东西都变了。

关于ZeroMQ(又名0MQ)，正如您可能已经知道的那样，它是每秒钟获得最多消息的一种(上次我检查时，在其引用服务器上大约是每秒钟400万条消息)，但是您可能也已经知道，不存在相关文档。您将很难找到如何启动服务器，更不用说如何使用它们了。我想这就是为什么还没有人贡献0MQ的部分原因。

玩得开心!

阿比，这都取决于你的用例。与其依赖别人对用例的描述，不如自由地将你的用例发布到rabbitmq讨论列表中。在推特上提问也会得到一些回应。祝福你，亚历克西斯