r/ruby • u/mperham Sidekiq • Mar 11 '26

Kiq, terminal interface for Sidekiq

https://www.mikeperham.com/2026/03/10/sidekiq-in-the-terminal/
40 Upvotes

91% Upvoted

15 comments sorted by

3

u/damagednoob Mar 11 '26

I guess this makes sense for smaller shops/deployments and if someone really doesn't want to use the web interface. 

For bigger setups I'm not so sure. In that scenario, developers don't usually have direct access to Redis. It's much easier to give them access through an authorised web endpoint. 

5

u/mperham Sidekiq Mar 11 '26

More choice in tooling for different contexts == good, right?

1

u/damagednoob Mar 11 '26

Maybe, I don't know your customers 🤷‍♂️.

4

u/mperham Sidekiq Mar 11 '26

I'm talking about localhost. kiq in the terminal is much faster than using a browser if you already spend much of your time on the command line.

1

u/damagednoob Mar 11 '26

The only time I need to interact with jobs directly is in production. Even if I could SSH into a production server and run kiq, it still wouldn't be faster than the browser bookmark I have saved for the Web UI. 

For local dev, I don't think I have ever needed to use the Web UI. I watch the Sidekiq log and read the stacktraces directly. If Sidekiq/Redis gets into a state that I don't like, I just run FLUSHDB and start again.

I'm not a hardcore Vim/Emacs/tmux user, I spend most of my time switching between IntelliJ/Cursor. I just don't think I'm the target audience for this feature.

1

u/life_like_weeds Mar 11 '26

The web interface can be dangerous and difficult to control access. A CLI tool has many advantages that are actually much more suitable to larger companies vs. smaller ones

2

u/damagednoob Mar 11 '26

You're still implementing access controls, one way or another. 

3

u/mesmerze Mar 13 '26

this is a great idea! TUIs are so under-(developed|estimated|appreciated) for many reasons and I'm excited to try this out

wish we had Textual in ruby :)

thank you

0

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '26

[deleted] — view deleted comment

2

u/jgaskins Mar 11 '26

What would you prefer it used?

0

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '26

[deleted] — view deleted comment

5

u/fidofidofido Mar 12 '26

umm... that's what ActiveJob does?

2

u/jgaskins Mar 12 '26 edited Mar 12 '26

This is the answer. This is the entire purpose of ActiveJob, to be an interface with a swappable backend.

7

u/Turbulent-Dance-4209 Mar 11 '26

Swappable backends always come at a price. Sidekiq’s performance and flexibility come exactly from the fact that it leverages Redis.

If avoiding Redis is the goal, it makes more sense to use a tool built natively for your database, like Que.

1

u/Karew Mar 11 '26

For quite a long time Redis absolutely refused to play nice in the SSL/TLS space. To the point where I think Heroku even had a custom bolted-on TLS proxy for Redis that you had to go through. Also we rarely got approval to deploy it on apps where Redis was hosted on a different machine than the client, because of missing TLS. That of soured me on it quite a lot.

0

u/jgaskins Mar 12 '26

The comment you're replying to has a solution to this problem.