(no title)
hangonhn | 1 month ago
I've never heard of Oban until now and the one we've considered was Temporal but that feels so much more than what we need. I like how light Oban is.
Does anyone have experience with both and is able to give a quick comparison?
Thanks!
BowBun|1 month ago
Temporal - if you have strict workflow requirements, want _guarantees_ that things complete, and are willing to take on extra complexity to achieve that. If you're a bank or something, probably a great choice.
Oban - DB-backed worker queue, which processes tasks off-thread. It does not give you the guarantees that Temporal can because it has not abstracted every push/pull into a first-class citizen. While it offers some similar features with workflows, to multiple 9's of reliability you will be hardening that yourself (based on my experience with Celery+Sidekiq)
Based on my heavy experience with both, I'd be happy to have both available to me in a system I'm working on. At my current job we are forced to use Temporal for all background processing, which for small tasks is just a lot of boilerplate.
kfajdsl|1 month ago
tecoholic|1 month ago
It’s a heavy weight that covers a lot of use cases. But we just run simple ProcessWorkers for our regular needs and ECS worker for heavier ML tasks.
owaislone|1 month ago
TkTech|1 month ago
kukkeliskuu|1 month ago
alanwreath|1 month ago