Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Add tool
Bull vs Resque: What are the differences?
- Storage: Bull uses Redis for storage, while Resque stores data in Redis as well but also relies on additional dependencies like Ruby and Rake.
- Initiative Development: Bull is developed and maintained by Node.js developers, ensuring a more Node.js-centric approach, whereas Resque is primarily developed and maintained by Ruby developers with a focus on the Ruby ecosystem.
- Concurrency Handling: Bull allows for multiple concurrent processes for jobs, enabling greater efficiency in processing, whereas Resque processes jobs sequentially, potentially leading to slower execution.
- Retry Strategies: Bull has built-in support for retrying failed jobs with customizable strategies, providing more flexibility and control, while Resque lacks this feature and may require manual intervention for retrying failed jobs.
- Job Prioritization: Bull supports job prioritization, allowing for the assignment of different priorities to jobs for efficient task handling, whereas Resque does not have built-in support for job prioritization.
- Event Handling: Bull provides robust event handling mechanisms, enabling developers to easily listen for various events in the job lifecycle, while Resque lacks comprehensive event handling capabilities.
In Summary, Bull and Resque differ in storage, development focus, concurrency handling, retry strategies, job prioritization, and event handling capabilities.
Get Advice from developers at your company using StackShare Enterprise. Sign up for StackShare Enterprise.
Learn MorePros of Bull
Pros of Resque
Pros of Bull
- Automatic recovery from process crashes2
- Ease of use1
- Based on Redis1
Pros of Resque
- Free5
- Scalable3
- Easy to use on heroku1
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
What is Bull?
The fastest, most reliable, Redis-based queue for Node.
Carefully written for rock solid stability and atomicity.
What is Resque?
Background jobs can be any Ruby class or module that responds to perform. Your existing classes can easily be converted to background jobs or you can create new classes specifically to do work. Or, you can do both.
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
What companies use Bull?
What companies use Resque?
What companies use Bull?
What companies use Resque?
See which teams inside your own company are using Bull or Resque.
Sign up for StackShare EnterpriseLearn MoreSign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
What tools integrate with Bull?
What tools integrate with Resque?
What tools integrate with Resque?
Blog Posts
+29 14
13422
What are some alternatives to Bull and Resque?
Buffalo
Buffalo is Go web framework. Yeah, I hate the word "framework" too! Buffalo is different though. Buffalo doesn't want to re-invent wheels like routing and templating. Buffalo is glue that wraps all of the best packages available and makes them all play nicely together.
Sidekiq
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.
Hangfire
It is an open-source framework that helps you to create, process and manage your background jobs, i.e. operations you don't want to put in your request processing pipeline. It supports all kind of background tasks – short-running and long-running, CPU intensive and I/O intensive, one shot and recurrent.
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.
PHP-FPM
It is an alternative PHP FastCGI implementation with some additional features useful for sites of any size, especially busier sites. It includes Adaptive process spawning, Advanced process management with graceful stop/start, Emergency restart in case of accidental opcode cache destruction etc.