StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. Utilities
  3. Background Jobs
  4. Message Queue
  5. Azure Service Bus vs Celery

Azure Service Bus vs Celery

OverviewDecisionsComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Celery
Celery
Stacks1.7K
Followers1.6K
Votes280
GitHub Stars27.5K
Forks4.9K
Azure Service Bus
Azure Service Bus
Stacks553
Followers536
Votes7

Azure Service Bus vs Celery: What are the differences?

Key Differences between Azure Service Bus and Celery

Azure Service Bus and Celery are both popular messaging frameworks used for handling asynchronous and distributed tasks. Despite their similarities, there are several key differences between the two:

  1. Architecture and Dependency: Azure Service Bus is a cloud-based messaging service provided by Microsoft Azure, while Celery is an open-source distributed task queue system. Azure Service Bus requires an Azure subscription and is directly integrated with other Azure services, while Celery can be used in any environment and with different message brokers.

  2. Language Support: Azure Service Bus supports various programming languages, including .NET, Java, Python, and Node.js. On the other hand, Celery is primarily used with Python and has extensive support for Python-related tools and frameworks.

  3. Scalability and Performance: Azure Service Bus is highly scalable and can handle a large number of messages at a high throughput. It provides advanced features like message batching, session handling, and dead-lettering. Celery, on the other hand, provides scalability to some extent by using distributed message brokers like RabbitMQ or Redis, but it may not be as scalable as Azure Service Bus in certain scenarios.

  4. Service Offering: Azure Service Bus is a fully managed service provided by Microsoft Azure, which means that the infrastructure and maintenance aspects are taken care of by Azure. Celery, being an open-source framework, requires more configuration and setup effort as it needs to be deployed and maintained by the users themselves.

  5. Monitoring and Management: Azure Service Bus provides extensive monitoring and management capabilities through Azure Portal, such as graphical representations of message rates, queues, and subscriptions. It also integrates with Azure Monitor for alerts and diagnostics. Celery, on the other hand, provides basic monitoring capabilities and logging but may require additional tools or customization for comprehensive monitoring and management.

  6. Cost: Azure Service Bus is a paid service, and the cost is based on message volume, throughput, and other factors. The pricing can vary based on the specific Azure region and the chosen pricing tier. Celery, being open-source, is free to use, but users need to consider the infrastructure and resources required to deploy and maintain their own Celery workers and message brokers.

In summary, Azure Service Bus is a cloud-based, fully managed messaging service provided by Microsoft Azure, offering extensive scalability, advanced features, and integration with other Azure services. Celery, on the other hand, is an open-source task queue system primarily used with Python, providing flexibility and customization options for distributed task processing.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs
CLI (Node.js)
or
Manual

Advice on Celery, Azure Service Bus

André
André

Technology Manager at GS1 Portugal - Codipor

Jul 30, 2020

Needs adviceon.NET Core.NET Core

Hello dear developers, our company is starting a new project for a new Web App, and we are currently designing the Architecture (we will be using .NET Core). We want to embark on something new, so we are thinking about migrating from a monolithic perspective to a microservices perspective. We wish to containerize those microservices and make them independent from each other. Is it the best way for microservices to communicate with each other via ESB, or is there a new way of doing this? Maybe complementing with an API Gateway? Can you recommend something else different than the two tools I provided?

We want something good for Cost/Benefit; performance should be high too (but not the primary constraint).

Thank you very much in advance :)

461k views461k
Comments

Detailed Comparison

Celery
Celery
Azure Service Bus
Azure Service Bus

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.

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.

Statistics
GitHub Stars
27.5K
GitHub Stars
-
GitHub Forks
4.9K
GitHub Forks
-
Stacks
1.7K
Stacks
553
Followers
1.6K
Followers
536
Votes
280
Votes
7
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 99
    Task queue
  • 63
    Python integration
  • 40
    Django integration
  • 30
    Scheduled Task
  • 19
    Publish/subsribe
Cons
  • 4
    Sometimes loses tasks
  • 1
    Depends on broker
Pros
  • 4
    Easy Integration with .Net
  • 2
    Cloud Native
  • 1
    Use while high messaging need
Cons
  • 1
    Lacking in JMS support
  • 1
    Observability of messages in the queue is lacking
  • 1
    Limited features in Basic tier
  • 1
    Skills can only be used in Azure - vendor lock-in

What are some alternatives to Celery, Azure Service Bus?

Kafka

Kafka

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

RabbitMQ

RabbitMQ

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

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.

NSQ

NSQ

NSQ is a realtime distributed messaging platform designed to operate at scale, handling billions of messages per day. It promotes distributed and decentralized topologies without single points of failure, enabling fault tolerance and high availability coupled with a reliable message delivery guarantee. See features & guarantees.

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.

ZeroMQ

ZeroMQ

The 0MQ lightweight messaging kernel is a library which extends the standard socket interfaces with features traditionally provided by specialised messaging middleware products. 0MQ sockets provide an abstraction of asynchronous message queues, multiple messaging patterns, message filtering (subscriptions), seamless access to multiple transport protocols and more.

Apache NiFi

Apache NiFi

An easy to use, powerful, and reliable system to process and distribute data. It supports powerful and scalable directed graphs of data routing, transformation, and system mediation logic.

Gearman

Gearman

Gearman allows you to do work in parallel, to load balance processing, and to call functions between languages. It can be used in a variety of applications, from high-availability web sites to the transport of database replication events.

Memphis

Memphis

Highly scalable and effortless data streaming platform. Made to enable developers and data teams to collaborate and build real-time and streaming apps fast.

IronMQ

IronMQ

An easy-to-use highly available message queuing service. Built for distributed cloud applications with critical messaging needs. Provides on-demand message queuing with advanced features and cloud-optimized performance.

Related Comparisons

Bootstrap
Materialize

Bootstrap vs Materialize

Laravel
Django

Django vs Laravel vs Node.js

Bootstrap
Foundation

Bootstrap vs Foundation vs Material UI

Node.js
Spring Boot

Node.js vs Spring-Boot

Liquibase
Flyway

Flyway vs Liquibase