# Sidekiq vs Resque: source lines of code compared

The Sidekiq vs Resque comparison on OctoCounts shows side-by-side source line counts for sidekiq/sidekiq and resque/resque, counted with the same engine and analysis options on the dates shown in the methodology line: files, total lines, code lines, comment lines, blank lines, and per-language totals, pinned to the exact commits listed below.

As of 2026-08-26, sidekiq/sidekiq contains 22,496 total lines (13,599 code) across 206 files, while resque/resque contains 7,098 total lines (3,800 code) across 65 files as of 2026-08-26. sidekiq/sidekiq is about 3.6x the size of resque/resque by code lines. Code size is not code quality: a larger count only means more source material, not a better or worse project.

| Metric | [sidekiq/sidekiq](https://octocounts.com/github/sidekiq/sidekiq) | [resque/resque](https://octocounts.com/github/resque/resque) |
| --- | ---: | ---: |
| Files | 206 | 65 |
| Total lines | 22,496 | 7,098 |
| Code lines | 13,599 | 3,800 |
| Comment lines | 5,656 | 1,985 |
| Blank lines | 3,241 | 1,313 |
| Languages counted | 9 | 6 |

Top languages in sidekiq/sidekiq: Ruby (60.9% of code), YAML (19.9% of code), Ruby HTML (8.5% of code). Top languages in resque/resque: Ruby (75.5% of code), Ruby HTML (12.8% of code), Rakefile (4.9% of code). Ruby, Ruby HTML, JavaScript, CSS appear in both top language lists; YAML appears only in sidekiq/sidekiq's top languages; Rakefile appears only in resque/resque's top languages.

Methodology: both counts come from cached OctoCounts reports generated with tokei. sidekiq/sidekiq was counted at ref main (commit 1bb4aa06e5aa) on 2026-08-26; resque/resque was counted at ref master (commit bb0f097121f1) on 2026-08-26. See the [counting methodology](https://octocounts.com/docs/methodology) for ignored directories and analysis options.
## About this comparison

sidekiq/sidekiq counts the Sidekiq repository: the Redis-backed background job processor for Ruby, its web UI, and its test suite. resque/resque counts the Resque repository: also a Redis-backed background job library for Ruby, with its own worker and failure-handling code. Both are job-processor source trees in the same language, counted on the dates in the methodology line.

Both repositories are Ruby codebases backed by Redis, and the per-language tables show Ruby dominating both counts — two projects in the same language and the same product category.

Sidekiq's repository includes its web monitoring UI as part of the open-source repository, so part of its count exists for operational tooling that an application may or may not deploy.

_The open-source Sidekiq repository does not contain every Sidekiq product — commercial editions are distributed separately — so this count covers the repository as published, not the full Sidekiq product line._

Sources: [sidekiq/sidekiq repository](https://github.com/sidekiq/sidekiq) · [resque/resque repository](https://github.com/resque/resque). Statements verified 2026-09-16.

Evidence and next steps:

- [sidekiq/sidekiq SLOC report](https://octocounts.com/github/sidekiq/sidekiq)
- [resque/resque SLOC report](https://octocounts.com/github/resque/resque)
- [Compare sidekiq/sidekiq and resque/resque interactively](https://octocounts.com/compare?left=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fsidekiq%2Fsidekiq&right=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fresque%2Fresque)

Note: code size is not code quality. OctoCounts only reports reproducible line counts and makes no claim that either project is better.

## Compare FAQ

### Which has more lines of code, sidekiq/sidekiq or resque/resque?

sidekiq/sidekiq has more code: 13,599 code lines versus 3,800 for resque/resque, about 3.6x as much, based on cached OctoCounts reports as of 2026-08-26.

### Does more source lines of code mean more complexity?

Not necessarily. SLOC measures size, not complexity, quality, or maintainability. A larger codebase can mean more features, more generated or vendored code, more verbose language idioms, or more tests — none of which imply the code is harder to work with. Use SLOC to gauge the scale of what you'd be reading or maintaining, not as a quality signal for sidekiq/sidekiq, resque/resque, or any repository.

### How is this comparison calculated?

Methodology: both counts come from cached OctoCounts reports generated with tokei. sidekiq/sidekiq was counted at ref main (commit 1bb4aa06e5aa) on 2026-08-26; resque/resque was counted at ref master (commit bb0f097121f1) on 2026-08-26. See the counting methodology for ignored directories and analysis options.

### Can I compare a different branch, tag, or commit?

Yes. This page shows the default branch for each repository. Use the interactive comparison tool to pick any public GitHub repository, branch, tag, or commit SHA for both sides and get a fresh side-by-side report.

## Related OctoCounts pages

- [Interactive repository comparison](https://octocounts.com/compare)
- [Recently analyzed repositories](https://octocounts.com/recent)
- [Popular SLOC reports](https://octocounts.com/popular)
- [Trending GitHub repositories](https://octocounts.com/trending)
- [Hall of Monoliths](https://octocounts.com/hall-of-monoliths)
- [Original research: how filtering changes SLOC counts](https://octocounts.com/research)
- [GitHub SLOC counter guide](https://octocounts.com/docs/github-sloc-counter)
- [Counting methodology](https://octocounts.com/docs/methodology)
- [SLOC and code metrics glossary](https://octocounts.com/docs/glossary)
- [OctoCounts API docs](https://octocounts.com/docs/api)