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. Kafka vs Sidekiq

Kafka vs Sidekiq

OverviewDecisionsComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Kafka
Kafka
Stacks24.2K
Followers22.3K
Votes607
GitHub Stars31.2K
Forks14.8K
Sidekiq
Sidekiq
Stacks1.2K
Followers632
Votes408

Kafka vs Sidekiq: What are the differences?

Introduction

Kafka and Sidekiq are two popular technologies used for different purposes in software development. This markdown code will provide a comparison of their key differences.

  1. Data Streaming vs Background Job Processing: Kafka is a distributed streaming platform that allows real-time data streaming by ingesting, storing, and processing large volumes of data. On the other hand, Sidekiq is a background job processing framework that focuses on performing asynchronous tasks and handling job queues.

  2. Publish-Subscribe vs Worker-Queue Model: Kafka follows a publish-subscribe messaging pattern, where producers publish messages to topics, and consumers subscribe to those topics to receive the messages. In contrast, Sidekiq employs a worker-queue model, where jobs are pushed to a queue, and workers asynchronously pick up and process those jobs.

  3. Fault Tolerance and Scalability: Kafka is designed for fault tolerance and high scalability, which means it can handle large data streams and ensure data availability even in the event of failures. Sidekiq, being a job processing framework, provides fault tolerance by retrying failed jobs but does not offer the same level of fault tolerance and scalability as Kafka.

  4. Message Persistence and Retention: Kafka uses a distributed commit log architecture, providing durable message persistence. Messages in Kafka are stored on disk and can be retained for a configurable period. Sidekiq, on the other hand, does not inherently provide message persistence, as it focuses on job processing rather than message persistence.

  5. Processing Latency: Kafka is optimized for low-latency processing and can provide near real-time data streaming. Sidekiq, on the other hand, may have higher processing latency due to the nature of background job processing, especially when jobs are queued and need to wait for available workers.

  6. Language Support: Kafka provides robust language support, with official client libraries available in various programming languages such as Java, Scala, Python, and more. Sidekiq, as a Ruby-based background job processing framework, primarily supports Ruby and utilizes Redis as its message broker.

In summary, Kafka is a distributed streaming platform focused on real-time data streaming, fault tolerance, and scalability, while Sidekiq is a background job processing framework that prioritizes asynchronous job queues and retry mechanisms.

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 Kafka, Sidekiq

viradiya
viradiya

Apr 12, 2020

Needs adviceonAngularJSAngularJSASP.NET CoreASP.NET CoreMSSQLMSSQL

We are going to develop a microservices-based application. It consists of AngularJS, ASP.NET Core, and MSSQL.

We have 3 types of microservices. Emailservice, Filemanagementservice, Filevalidationservice

I am a beginner in microservices. But I have read about RabbitMQ, but come to know that there are Redis and Kafka also in the market. So, I want to know which is best.

933k views933k
Comments
Ishfaq
Ishfaq

Feb 28, 2020

Needs advice

Our backend application is sending some external messages to a third party application at the end of each backend (CRUD) API call (from UI) and these external messages take too much extra time (message building, processing, then sent to the third party and log success/failure), UI application has no concern to these extra third party messages.

So currently we are sending these third party messages by creating a new child thread at end of each REST API call so UI application doesn't wait for these extra third party API calls.

I want to integrate Apache Kafka for these extra third party API calls, so I can also retry on failover third party API calls in a queue(currently third party messages are sending from multiple threads at the same time which uses too much processing and resources) and logging, etc.

Question 1: Is this a use case of a message broker?

Question 2: If it is then Kafka vs RabitMQ which is the better?

804k views804k
Comments
Roman
Roman

Senior Back-End Developer, Software Architect

Feb 12, 2019

ReviewonKafkaKafka

I use Kafka because it has almost infinite scaleability in terms of processing events (could be scaled to process hundreds of thousands of events), great monitoring (all sorts of metrics are exposed via JMX).

Downsides of using Kafka are:

  • you have to deal with Zookeeper
  • you have to implement advanced routing yourself (compared to RabbitMQ it has no advanced routing)
10.9k views10.9k
Comments

Detailed Comparison

Kafka
Kafka
Sidekiq
Sidekiq

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

Sidekiq uses threads to handle many jobs at the same time in the same process. It does not require Rails but will integrate tightly with Rails 3/4 to make background processing dead simple.

Written at LinkedIn in Scala;Used by LinkedIn to offload processing of all page and other views;Defaults to using persistence, uses OS disk cache for hot data (has higher throughput then any of the above having persistence enabled);Supports both on-line as off-line processing
-
Statistics
GitHub Stars
31.2K
GitHub Stars
-
GitHub Forks
14.8K
GitHub Forks
-
Stacks
24.2K
Stacks
1.2K
Followers
22.3K
Followers
632
Votes
607
Votes
408
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 126
    High-throughput
  • 119
    Distributed
  • 92
    Scalable
  • 86
    High-Performance
  • 66
    Durable
Cons
  • 32
    Non-Java clients are second-class citizens
  • 29
    Needs Zookeeper
  • 9
    Operational difficulties
  • 5
    Terrible Packaging
Pros
  • 124
    Simple
  • 99
    Efficient background processing
  • 60
    Scalability
  • 37
    Better then resque
  • 26
    Great documentation

What are some alternatives to Kafka, Sidekiq?

RabbitMQ

RabbitMQ

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

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.

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.

Beanstalkd

Beanstalkd

Beanstalks's interface is generic, but was originally designed for reducing the latency of page views in high-volume web applications by running time-consuming tasks asynchronously.

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.

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