Ben, the author of GoodJob, offers a reflective analysis of the background job ecosystem for Rails and Active Job, examining the decision-making process, the role of omakase defaults like Solid Queue, and the practical realities of choosing between Solid Queue, GoodJob, Sidekiq, and Karafka based on performance needs, database choice, and team context.
Choosing a background job backend for a Rails application in 2026 is less about finding the objectively "best" tool and more about navigating a complex web of technical, organizational, and personal contexts. This is the core insight from Ben, the author of GoodJob, who recently shared his personal perspective on the decision-making process. His analysis moves beyond feature comparisons to explore how developers actually make these choices, the powerful influence of defaults, and the practical trade-offs between the leading options: Solid Queue, GoodJob, Sidekiq, and Karafka.
Ben frames the entire discussion around a sobering observation about software engineering decisions. He notes that many justifications for choosing a technology—whether it's labeled "more modern," has a unique architecture, or is used by successful companies—are often post-hoc rationalizations. The assumption that knowledge generation is efficient, meaning all problems and solutions have been rigorously stress-tested and their trade-offs universally understood, is a fallacy. In reality, teams often start with a preferred solution and work backward to justify it, a process that lacks the rigorous analysis of actual bottlenecks, business context, and team skills that truly informed decisions would require. This dynamic is especially pronounced in two scenarios: new projects, where decisions are speculative and often become the subject of intense debate (a phenomenon known as the Law of Triviality), and existing projects, where the pressure to innovate can lead to choosing a "solution-at-hand" rather than deeply investigating the underlying problem.
The Power of the Omakase Default: Solid Queue
A major differentiator in the Rails background job landscape is the concept of "omakase," or the chef's choice. Solid Queue, now the default job backend included with Rails, represents this principle. When you run rails new, Solid Queue is part of the package. This is a significant signal from the Rails core team, indicating a high level of confidence in its stability and suitability for the majority of use cases. For many developers, especially those who chose Rails for its cohesive philosophy and "batteries included" approach, this default is a compelling reason to adopt Solid Queue. It eliminates a valueless choice, aligning with the Rails Manifesto's goal of conceptual integrity.
However, Ben acknowledges that not everyone embraces the omakase model. The Rails community has always had a strong contingent that swaps out default components, from ActionMailer to Concerns, often citing a desire for more modern patterns or different architectural philosophies. Solid Queue occupies a unique position here: it is both the new, exciting default and a conservative, stable choice. This duality makes it a strong candidate for many projects, especially those that don't have extreme performance requirements or specific database constraints. Its trajectory is also promising, with features like batches on the horizon, further closing the gap with more mature alternatives.
Navigating the Incomparables: Performance, Database, and Community
When the default isn't the right fit, the decision becomes more nuanced. Ben argues against the idea of a simple decision tree, as the context is always more complex than it appears. The choice of database, for instance, is not just "Postgres, MySQL, SQLite, or Redis?" but involves layers of deployment, management, and configuration that can fundamentally alter the equation. A team's existing expertise, the operational environment, and even interpersonal dynamics can influence the final choice more than any feature list.
For those who fall into the category where the backend choice does actually matter, Ben offers clear, context-driven advice:
If Performance is the Absolute Priority: For applications where performance is the superlative concern—meaning throughput, latency, and resource efficiency are the paramount goals—Sidekiq Enterprise or Karafka are the top contenders. These tools are engineered for high performance and are often the best choice outside of building a custom solution in-house. While they may involve cost (in the case of Sidekiq Enterprise) or a steeper learning curve, they are designed to handle demanding workloads effectively.
If You're Using MySQL or SQLite: Solid Queue is the recommended option. It is optimized for these databases and provides a robust, well-integrated experience. It's a strong choice in an absolute sense, not just a convenient one.
If You're Using PostgreSQL: GoodJob becomes the natural fit. Its feature set is built to leverage PostgreSQL-specific capabilities like advisory locks, which allows for simpler implementation of complex features like batches and unique jobs without the workaround complexity required for multi-database support. Its architecture is straightforward, with data stored in a single table, making it easy to inspect and manage. While Ben acknowledges its limitations (such as interactions with PgBouncer or the performance characteristics of advisory locks under extreme load), he notes that these are often edge cases that most applications won't encounter. The key strength of GoodJob in this context is its deep integration with PostgreSQL, offering a full-featured solution that feels native to the database.
The Human Element: Community and Problem-Solving
Ultimately, Ben emphasizes that the most critical factor may not be the technical specifications of the backend itself, but the community surrounding it. Every system has its quirks and failure modes. GoodJob, Solid Queue, Sidekiq, and Karafka all have their own sets of challenges and limitations. When a problem arises, it's often unique to a specific setup or a configuration oversight. The solution rarely involves switching the entire job backend; it's more likely about debugging a particular issue.
This is where community becomes invaluable. A strong community of peers who work on similar systems can provide context, suggest diagnostic paths, and offer moral support. The choice of a backend should therefore also consider the ecosystem and support network available. Making friends and building a network of peers who understand your technical context is a practical strategy for navigating the inevitable complexities of running a background job system at scale.
In conclusion, the landscape of background job backends for Rails in 2026 is rich with excellent options. The decision is not a simple matter of ranking features but a deeply contextual one. For many, the default Solid Queue will be the perfect choice, embodying the Rails philosophy of eliminating valueless decisions. For others with specific performance needs or database preferences, GoodJob, Sidekiq, or Karafka offer powerful alternatives. Regardless of the path chosen, the most important takeaway is that success depends less on the tool itself and more on the thoughtful consideration of your project's unique context and the strength of the community you build around it.
Related Resources:
Comments
Please log in or register to join the discussion