Que vs Sidekiq: What are the differences?
Developers describe Que as "A Ruby job queue that uses PostgreSQL's advisory locks for speed and reliability". Que is a high-performance alternative to DelayedJob or QueueClassic that improves the reliability of your application by protecting your jobs with the same ACID guarantees as the rest of your data. On the other hand, Sidekiq is detailed as "Simple, efficient background processing for Ruby". 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.
Que and Sidekiq belong to "Background Processing" category of the tech stack.
Que and Sidekiq are both open source tools. Sidekiq with 9.66K GitHub stars and 1.66K forks on GitHub appears to be more popular than Que with 1.47K GitHub stars and 119 GitHub forks.
What is Que?
What is Sidekiq?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Why do developers choose Que?
Sign up to add, upvote and see more prosMake informed product decisions
What are the cons of using Que?
What are the cons of using Sidekiq?
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
delayed_job is a great Rails background job library for new projects, as it only uses what you already have: a relational database. We happily used it during the company’s first two years.
But it started to falter as our web and database transactions significantly grew. Our app interacted with users via SMS texts sent inside background jobs. Because the delayed_job daemon ran every couple seconds, this meant that users often waited several long seconds before getting text replies, which was not acceptable. Moreover, job processing was done inside AWS Elastic Beanstalk web instances, which were already under stress and not meant to handle jobs.
We needed a fast background job system that could process jobs in near real-time and integrate well with AWS. Sidekiq is a fast and popular Ruby background job library, but it does not leverage the Elastic Beanstalk worker architecture, and you have to maintain a Redis instance.
We ended up choosing active-elastic-job, which seamlessly integrates with worker instances and Amazon SQS. SQS is a fast queue and you don’t need to worry about infrastructure or scaling, as AWS handles it for you.
We noticed significant performance gains immediately after making the switch.
We use Sidekiq to process millions of Ruby background jobs a day under normal loads. We sometimes process more than that when running one-off backfill tasks.
With so many jobs, it wouldn't really make sense to use delayed_job, as it would put our main database under unnecessary load, which would make it a bottleneck with most DB queries serving jobs and not end users. I suppose you could create a separate DB just for jobs, but that can be a hassle. Sidekiq uses a separate Redis instance so you don't have this problem. And it is very performant!
I also like that its free version comes "batteries included" with:
- A web monitoring UI that provides some nice stats.
- An API that can come in handy for one-off tasks, like changing the queue of certain already enqueued jobs.
Sidekiq is a pleasure to use. All our engineers love it!
We turn to Sidekiq when we need to run background jobs in a Rails app, which we do for just about every Rails app we write. We especially like the ops tools that come with Sidekiq, which make it easy to monitor and maintain.
Background processing of Pushover push notifications to admins when sales occur, payments processing via Pin Payments, Campaign Monitor transaction email sending, and Intercom event API posting.
Sidekiq is used extensively for a multitude of background jobs, everything from audio/video post-processing to sending push notifications.