If you're starting jobs in response to queues, you want those jobs to start quickly. And if you're starting a lot of jobs, the less memory they consume, the more of them you can pack in your cluster and the less you need to autoscale your cluster.
Quarkus uses build-time steps for most of what would be done at runtime (DI, mapping, routing etc.) in Spring. This makes it faster to start up and reduces reflection overhead even when not using GraalVM.
It's true, they're similar. Quarkus leans a bit more towards Java EE, Micronaut a bit more towards Spring. I don't think it would be worth switching from one to the other.
Cool, thank you! I've never seen Quarkus before so it's new to me, but I've had some success with Micronaut so I was a little confused. Surprised they don't work together; the goals do seem very similar.
Quarkus uses build-time steps for most of what would be done at runtime (DI, mapping, routing etc.) in Spring. This makes it faster to start up and reduces reflection overhead even when not using GraalVM.