Alternatives to Azure App Service logo

Alternatives to Azure App Service

Azure Service Fabric, AWS Elastic Beanstalk, Google App Engine, Azure Functions, and Azure Service Bus are the most popular alternatives and competitors to Azure App Service.
295
370
+ 1
11

What is Azure App Service and what are its top alternatives?

Quickly build, deploy, and scale web apps created with popular frameworks .NET, .NET Core, Node.js, Java, PHP, Ruby, or Python, in containers or running on any operating system. Meet rigorous, enterprise-grade performance, security, and compliance requirements by using the fully managed platform for your operational and monitoring tasks.
Azure App Service is a tool in the Platform as a Service category of a tech stack.

Top Alternatives to Azure App Service

  • Azure Service Fabric
    Azure Service Fabric

    Azure Service Fabric is a distributed systems platform that makes it easy to package, deploy, and manage scalable and reliable microservices. Service Fabric addresses the significant challenges in developing and managing cloud apps. ...

  • AWS Elastic Beanstalk
    AWS Elastic Beanstalk

    Once you upload your application, Elastic Beanstalk automatically handles the deployment details of capacity provisioning, load balancing, auto-scaling, and application health monitoring. ...

  • Google App Engine
    Google App Engine

    Google has a reputation for highly reliable, high performance infrastructure. With App Engine you can take advantage of the 10 years of knowledge Google has in running massively scalable, performance driven systems. App Engine applications are easy to build, easy to maintain, and easy to scale as your traffic and data storage needs grow. ...

  • Azure Functions
    Azure Functions

    Azure Functions is an event driven, compute-on-demand experience that extends the existing Azure application platform with capabilities to implement code triggered by events occurring in virtually any Azure or 3rd party service as well as on-premises systems. ...

  • Azure Service Bus
    Azure Service Bus

    It is a cloud messaging system for connecting apps and devices across public and private clouds. You can depend on it when you need highly-reliable cloud messaging service between applications and services, even when one or more is offline. ...

  • Kubernetes
    Kubernetes

    Kubernetes is an open source orchestration system for Docker containers. It handles scheduling onto nodes in a compute cluster and actively manages workloads to ensure that their state matches the users declared intentions. ...

  • JavaScript
    JavaScript

    JavaScript is most known as the scripting language for Web pages, but used in many non-browser environments as well such as node.js or Apache CouchDB. It is a prototype-based, multi-paradigm scripting language that is dynamic,and supports object-oriented, imperative, and functional programming styles. ...

  • Git
    Git

    Git is a free and open source distributed version control system designed to handle everything from small to very large projects with speed and efficiency. ...

Azure App Service alternatives & related posts

Azure Service Fabric logo

Azure Service Fabric

101
282
26
Distributed systems platform that simplifies build, package, deploy, and management of scalable microservices apps
101
282
+ 1
26
PROS OF AZURE SERVICE FABRIC
  • 5
    Intelligent, fast, reliable
  • 4
    Runs most of Azure core services
  • 3
    Reliability
  • 3
    Superior programming models
  • 3
    More reliable than Kubernetes
  • 3
    Open source
  • 2
    Quickest recovery and healing in the world
  • 1
    Deploy anywhere
  • 1
    Is data storage technology
  • 1
    Battle hardened in Azure > 10 Years
CONS OF AZURE SERVICE FABRIC
    Be the first to leave a con

    related Azure Service Fabric posts

    AWS Elastic Beanstalk logo

    AWS Elastic Beanstalk

    2.1K
    1.8K
    241
    Quickly deploy and manage applications in the AWS cloud.
    2.1K
    1.8K
    + 1
    241
    PROS OF AWS ELASTIC BEANSTALK
    • 77
      Integrates with other aws services
    • 65
      Simple deployment
    • 44
      Fast
    • 28
      Painless
    • 16
      Free
    • 4
      Well-documented
    • 3
      Independend app container
    • 2
      Postgres hosting
    • 2
      Ability to be customized
    CONS OF AWS ELASTIC BEANSTALK
    • 2
      Charges appear automatically after exceeding free quota
    • 1
      Lots of moving parts and config
    • 0
      Slow deployments

    related AWS Elastic Beanstalk posts

    Julien DeFrance
    Principal Software Engineer at Tophatter · | 16 upvotes · 3.1M views

    Back in 2014, I was given an opportunity to re-architect SmartZip Analytics platform, and flagship product: SmartTargeting. This is a SaaS software helping real estate professionals keeping up with their prospects and leads in a given neighborhood/territory, finding out (thanks to predictive analytics) who's the most likely to list/sell their home, and running cross-channel marketing automation against them: direct mail, online ads, email... The company also does provide Data APIs to Enterprise customers.

    I had inherited years and years of technical debt and I knew things had to change radically. The first enabler to this was to make use of the cloud and go with AWS, so we would stop re-inventing the wheel, and build around managed/scalable services.

    For the SaaS product, we kept on working with Rails as this was what my team had the most knowledge in. We've however broken up the monolith and decoupled the front-end application from the backend thanks to the use of Rails API so we'd get independently scalable micro-services from now on.

    Our various applications could now be deployed using AWS Elastic Beanstalk so we wouldn't waste any more efforts writing time-consuming Capistrano deployment scripts for instance. Combined with Docker so our application would run within its own container, independently from the underlying host configuration.

    Storage-wise, we went with Amazon S3 and ditched any pre-existing local or network storage people used to deal with in our legacy systems. On the database side: Amazon RDS / MySQL initially. Ultimately migrated to Amazon RDS for Aurora / MySQL when it got released. Once again, here you need a managed service your cloud provider handles for you.

    Future improvements / technology decisions included:

    Caching: Amazon ElastiCache / Memcached CDN: Amazon CloudFront Systems Integration: Segment / Zapier Data-warehousing: Amazon Redshift BI: Amazon Quicksight / Superset Search: Elasticsearch / Amazon Elasticsearch Service / Algolia Monitoring: New Relic

    As our usage grows, patterns changed, and/or our business needs evolved, my role as Engineering Manager then Director of Engineering was also to ensure my team kept on learning and innovating, while delivering on business value.

    One of these innovations was to get ourselves into Serverless : Adopting AWS Lambda was a big step forward. At the time, only available for Node.js (Not Ruby ) but a great way to handle cost efficiency, unpredictable traffic, sudden bursts of traffic... Ultimately you want the whole chain of services involved in a call to be serverless, and that's when we've started leveraging Amazon DynamoDB on these projects so they'd be fully scalable.

    See more

    We initially started out with Heroku as our PaaS provider due to a desire to use it by our original developer for our Ruby on Rails application/website at the time. We were finding response times slow, it was painfully slow, sometimes taking 10 seconds to start loading the main page. Moving up to the next "compute" level was going to be very expensive.

    We moved our site over to AWS Elastic Beanstalk , not only did response times on the site practically become instant, our cloud bill for the application was cut in half.

    In database world we are currently using Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL also, we have both MariaDB and Microsoft SQL Server both hosted on Amazon RDS. The plan is to migrate to AWS Aurora Serverless for all 3 of those database systems.

    Additional services we use for our public applications: AWS Lambda, Python, Redis, Memcached, AWS Elastic Load Balancing (ELB), Amazon Elasticsearch Service, Amazon ElastiCache

    See more
    Google App Engine logo

    Google App Engine

    10K
    7.9K
    610
    Build web applications on the same scalable systems that power Google applications
    10K
    7.9K
    + 1
    610
    PROS OF GOOGLE APP ENGINE
    • 145
      Easy to deploy
    • 106
      Auto scaling
    • 80
      Good free plan
    • 62
      Easy management
    • 56
      Scalability
    • 35
      Low cost
    • 32
      Comprehensive set of features
    • 28
      All services in one place
    • 22
      Simple scaling
    • 19
      Quick and reliable cloud servers
    • 6
      Granular Billing
    • 5
      Easy to develop and unit test
    • 4
      Monitoring gives comprehensive set of key indicators
    • 3
      Really easy to quickly bring up a full stack
    • 3
      Create APIs quickly with cloud endpoints
    • 2
      Mostly up
    • 2
      No Ops
    CONS OF GOOGLE APP ENGINE
      Be the first to leave a con

      related Google App Engine posts

      Dmitry Mukhin

      Uploadcare has built an infinitely scalable infrastructure by leveraging AWS. Building on top of AWS allows us to process 350M daily requests for file uploads, manipulations, and deliveries. When we started in 2011 the only cloud alternative to AWS was Google App Engine which was a no-go for a rather complex solution we wanted to build. We also didn’t want to buy any hardware or use co-locations.

      Our stack handles receiving files, communicating with external file sources, managing file storage, managing user and file data, processing files, file caching and delivery, and managing user interface dashboards.

      At its core, Uploadcare runs on Python. The Europython 2011 conference in Florence really inspired us, coupled with the fact that it was general enough to solve all of our challenges informed this decision. Additionally we had prior experience working in Python.

      We chose to build the main application with Django because of its feature completeness and large footprint within the Python ecosystem.

      All the communications within our ecosystem occur via several HTTP APIs, Redis, Amazon S3, and Amazon DynamoDB. We decided on this architecture so that our our system could be scalable in terms of storage and database throughput. This way we only need Django running on top of our database cluster. We use PostgreSQL as our database because it is considered an industry standard when it comes to clustering and scaling.

      See more
      Nick Rockwell
      SVP, Engineering at Fastly · | 12 upvotes · 424.7K views

      So, the shift from Amazon EC2 to Google App Engine and generally #AWS to #GCP was a long decision and in the end, it's one that we've taken with eyes open and that we reserve the right to modify at any time. And to be clear, we continue to do a lot of stuff with AWS. But, by default, the content of the decision was, for our consumer-facing products, we're going to use GCP first. And if there's some reason why we don't think that's going to work out great, then we'll happily use AWS. In practice, that hasn't really happened. We've been able to meet almost 100% of our needs in GCP.

      So it's basically mostly Google Kubernetes Engine , we're mostly running stuff on Kubernetes right now.

      #AWStoGCPmigration #cloudmigration #migration

      See more
      Azure Functions logo

      Azure Functions

      665
      691
      62
      Listen and react to events across your stack
      665
      691
      + 1
      62
      PROS OF AZURE FUNCTIONS
      • 14
        Pay only when invoked
      • 11
        Great developer experience for C#
      • 9
        Multiple languages supported
      • 7
        Great debugging support
      • 5
        Can be used as lightweight https service
      • 4
        Easy scalability
      • 3
        WebHooks
      • 3
        Costo
      • 2
        Event driven
      • 2
        Azure component events for Storage, services etc
      • 2
        Poor developer experience for C#
      CONS OF AZURE FUNCTIONS
      • 1
        No persistent (writable) file system available
      • 1
        Poor support for Linux environments
      • 1
        Sporadic server & language runtime issues
      • 1
        Not suited for long-running applications

      related Azure Functions posts

      Kestas Barzdaitis
      Entrepreneur & Engineer · | 16 upvotes · 764.9K views

      CodeFactor being a #SAAS product, our goal was to run on a cloud-native infrastructure since day one. We wanted to stay product focused, rather than having to work on the infrastructure that supports the application. We needed a cloud-hosting provider that would be reliable, economical and most efficient for our product.

      CodeFactor.io aims to provide an automated and frictionless code review service for software developers. That requires agility, instant provisioning, autoscaling, security, availability and compliance management features. We looked at the top three #IAAS providers that take up the majority of market share: Amazon's Amazon EC2 , Microsoft's Microsoft Azure, and Google Compute Engine.

      AWS has been available since 2006 and has developed the most extensive services ant tools variety at a massive scale. Azure and GCP are about half the AWS age, but also satisfied our technical requirements.

      It is worth noting that even though all three providers support Docker containerization services, GCP has the most robust offering due to their investments in Kubernetes. Also, if you are a Microsoft shop, and develop in .NET - Visual Studio Azure shines at integration there and all your existing .NET code works seamlessly on Azure. All three providers have serverless computing offerings (AWS Lambda, Azure Functions, and Google Cloud Functions). Additionally, all three providers have machine learning tools, but GCP appears to be the most developer-friendly, intuitive and complete when it comes to #Machinelearning and #AI.

      The prices between providers are competitive across the board. For our requirements, AWS would have been the most expensive, GCP the least expensive and Azure was in the middle. Plus, if you #Autoscale frequently with large deltas, note that Azure and GCP have per minute billing, where AWS bills you per hour. We also applied for the #Startup programs with all three providers, and this is where Azure shined. While AWS and GCP for startups would have covered us for about one year of infrastructure costs, Azure Sponsorship would cover about two years of CodeFactor's hosting costs. Moreover, Azure Team was terrific - I felt that they wanted to work with us where for AWS and GCP we were just another startup.

      In summary, we were leaning towards GCP. GCP's advantages in containerization, automation toolset, #Devops mindset, and pricing were the driving factors there. Nevertheless, we could not say no to Azure's financial incentives and a strong sense of partnership and support throughout the process.

      Bottom line is, IAAS offerings with AWS, Azure, and GCP are evolving fast. At CodeFactor, we aim to be platform agnostic where it is practical and retain the flexibility to cherry-pick the best products across providers.

      See more

      REST API for SaaS application

      I'm currently developing an Azure Functions REST API with TypeScript, tsoa, Mongoose, and Typegoose that contains simple CRUD activities. It does the job and has type-safety as well as the ability to generate OpenAPI specs for me.

      However, as the app scales up, there are more duplicated codes (for similar operations - like CRUD in each different model). It's also becoming more complex because I need to implement a multi-tenancy SaaS for both the API and the database.

      So I chose to implement a repository pattern, and I have a "feeling" that .NET and C# will make development easier because, unlike TypeScript, it includes native support for Dependency Injection and great things like LINQ.

      It wouldn't take much effort to migrate because I can easily translate interfaces and basic CRUD operations to C#. So, I'm looking for advice on whether it's worth converting from TypeScript to.NET.

      See more
      Azure Service Bus logo

      Azure Service Bus

      268
      526
      7
      Reliable cloud messaging as a service (MaaS)
      268
      526
      + 1
      7
      PROS OF AZURE SERVICE BUS
      • 4
        Easy Integration with .Net
      • 2
        Cloud Native
      • 1
        Use while high messaging need
      CONS OF AZURE SERVICE BUS
      • 1
        Limited features in Basic tier
      • 1
        Skills can only be used in Azure - vendor lock-in
      • 1
        Lacking in JMS support
      • 1
        Observability of messages in the queue is lacking

      related Azure Service Bus posts

      Shared insights
      on
      Azure Service BusAzure Service BusIBM MQIBM MQ

      Want to get the differences in features and enhancement, pros and cons, and also how to Migrate from IBM MQ to Azure Service Bus.

      See more
      Kubernetes logo

      Kubernetes

      58.6K
      50.6K
      677
      Manage a cluster of Linux containers as a single system to accelerate Dev and simplify Ops
      58.6K
      50.6K
      + 1
      677
      PROS OF KUBERNETES
      • 164
        Leading docker container management solution
      • 128
        Simple and powerful
      • 106
        Open source
      • 76
        Backed by google
      • 58
        The right abstractions
      • 25
        Scale services
      • 20
        Replication controller
      • 11
        Permission managment
      • 9
        Supports autoscaling
      • 8
        Cheap
      • 8
        Simple
      • 6
        Self-healing
      • 5
        No cloud platform lock-in
      • 5
        Promotes modern/good infrascture practice
      • 5
        Open, powerful, stable
      • 5
        Reliable
      • 4
        Scalable
      • 4
        Quick cloud setup
      • 3
        Cloud Agnostic
      • 3
        Captain of Container Ship
      • 3
        A self healing environment with rich metadata
      • 3
        Runs on azure
      • 3
        Backed by Red Hat
      • 3
        Custom and extensibility
      • 2
        Sfg
      • 2
        Gke
      • 2
        Everything of CaaS
      • 2
        Golang
      • 2
        Easy setup
      • 2
        Expandable
      CONS OF KUBERNETES
      • 16
        Steep learning curve
      • 15
        Poor workflow for development
      • 8
        Orchestrates only infrastructure
      • 4
        High resource requirements for on-prem clusters
      • 2
        Too heavy for simple systems
      • 1
        Additional vendor lock-in (Docker)
      • 1
        More moving parts to secure
      • 1
        Additional Technology Overhead

      related Kubernetes posts

      Conor Myhrvold
      Tech Brand Mgr, Office of CTO at Uber · | 44 upvotes · 9.6M views

      How Uber developed the open source, end-to-end distributed tracing Jaeger , now a CNCF project:

      Distributed tracing is quickly becoming a must-have component in the tools that organizations use to monitor their complex, microservice-based architectures. At Uber, our open source distributed tracing system Jaeger saw large-scale internal adoption throughout 2016, integrated into hundreds of microservices and now recording thousands of traces every second.

      Here is the story of how we got here, from investigating off-the-shelf solutions like Zipkin, to why we switched from pull to push architecture, and how distributed tracing will continue to evolve:

      https://eng.uber.com/distributed-tracing/

      (GitHub Pages : https://www.jaegertracing.io/, GitHub: https://github.com/jaegertracing/jaeger)

      Bindings/Operator: Python Java Node.js Go C++ Kubernetes JavaScript OpenShift C# Apache Spark

      See more
      Ashish Singh
      Tech Lead, Big Data Platform at Pinterest · | 38 upvotes · 2.9M views

      To provide employees with the critical need of interactive querying, we’ve worked with Presto, an open-source distributed SQL query engine, over the years. Operating Presto at Pinterest’s scale has involved resolving quite a few challenges like, supporting deeply nested and huge thrift schemas, slow/ bad worker detection and remediation, auto-scaling cluster, graceful cluster shutdown and impersonation support for ldap authenticator.

      Our infrastructure is built on top of Amazon EC2 and we leverage Amazon S3 for storing our data. This separates compute and storage layers, and allows multiple compute clusters to share the S3 data.

      We have hundreds of petabytes of data and tens of thousands of Apache Hive tables. Our Presto clusters are comprised of a fleet of 450 r4.8xl EC2 instances. Presto clusters together have over 100 TBs of memory and 14K vcpu cores. Within Pinterest, we have close to more than 1,000 monthly active users (out of total 1,600+ Pinterest employees) using Presto, who run about 400K queries on these clusters per month.

      Each query submitted to Presto cluster is logged to a Kafka topic via Singer. Singer is a logging agent built at Pinterest and we talked about it in a previous post. Each query is logged when it is submitted and when it finishes. When a Presto cluster crashes, we will have query submitted events without corresponding query finished events. These events enable us to capture the effect of cluster crashes over time.

      Each Presto cluster at Pinterest has workers on a mix of dedicated AWS EC2 instances and Kubernetes pods. Kubernetes platform provides us with the capability to add and remove workers from a Presto cluster very quickly. The best-case latency on bringing up a new worker on Kubernetes is less than a minute. However, when the Kubernetes cluster itself is out of resources and needs to scale up, it can take up to ten minutes. Some other advantages of deploying on Kubernetes platform is that our Presto deployment becomes agnostic of cloud vendor, instance types, OS, etc.

      #BigData #AWS #DataScience #DataEngineering

      See more
      JavaScript logo

      JavaScript

      349.6K
      266.2K
      8.1K
      Lightweight, interpreted, object-oriented language with first-class functions
      349.6K
      266.2K
      + 1
      8.1K
      PROS OF JAVASCRIPT
      • 1.7K
        Can be used on frontend/backend
      • 1.5K
        It's everywhere
      • 1.2K
        Lots of great frameworks
      • 896
        Fast
      • 745
        Light weight
      • 425
        Flexible
      • 392
        You can't get a device today that doesn't run js
      • 286
        Non-blocking i/o
      • 236
        Ubiquitousness
      • 191
        Expressive
      • 55
        Extended functionality to web pages
      • 49
        Relatively easy language
      • 46
        Executed on the client side
      • 30
        Relatively fast to the end user
      • 25
        Pure Javascript
      • 21
        Functional programming
      • 15
        Async
      • 13
        Full-stack
      • 12
        Setup is easy
      • 12
        Its everywhere
      • 11
        JavaScript is the New PHP
      • 11
        Because I love functions
      • 10
        Like it or not, JS is part of the web standard
      • 9
        Can be used in backend, frontend and DB
      • 9
        Expansive community
      • 9
        Future Language of The Web
      • 9
        Easy
      • 8
        No need to use PHP
      • 8
        For the good parts
      • 8
        Can be used both as frontend and backend as well
      • 8
        Everyone use it
      • 8
        Most Popular Language in the World
      • 8
        Easy to hire developers
      • 7
        Love-hate relationship
      • 7
        Powerful
      • 7
        Photoshop has 3 JS runtimes built in
      • 7
        Evolution of C
      • 7
        Popularized Class-Less Architecture & Lambdas
      • 7
        Agile, packages simple to use
      • 7
        Supports lambdas and closures
      • 6
        1.6K Can be used on frontend/backend
      • 6
        It's fun
      • 6
        Hard not to use
      • 6
        Nice
      • 6
        Client side JS uses the visitors CPU to save Server Res
      • 6
        Versitile
      • 6
        It let's me use Babel & Typescript
      • 6
        Easy to make something
      • 6
        Its fun and fast
      • 6
        Can be used on frontend/backend/Mobile/create PRO Ui
      • 5
        Function expressions are useful for callbacks
      • 5
        What to add
      • 5
        Client processing
      • 5
        Everywhere
      • 5
        Scope manipulation
      • 5
        Stockholm Syndrome
      • 5
        Promise relationship
      • 5
        Clojurescript
      • 4
        Because it is so simple and lightweight
      • 4
        Only Programming language on browser
      • 1
        Hard to learn
      • 1
        Test
      • 1
        Test2
      • 1
        Easy to understand
      • 1
        Not the best
      • 1
        Easy to learn
      • 1
        Subskill #4
      • 0
        Hard 彤
      CONS OF JAVASCRIPT
      • 22
        A constant moving target, too much churn
      • 20
        Horribly inconsistent
      • 15
        Javascript is the New PHP
      • 9
        No ability to monitor memory utilitization
      • 8
        Shows Zero output in case of ANY error
      • 7
        Thinks strange results are better than errors
      • 6
        Can be ugly
      • 3
        No GitHub
      • 2
        Slow

      related JavaScript posts

      Zach Holman

      Oof. I have truly hated JavaScript for a long time. Like, for over twenty years now. Like, since the Clinton administration. It's always been a nightmare to deal with all of the aspects of that silly language.

      But wowza, things have changed. Tooling is just way, way better. I'm primarily web-oriented, and using React and Apollo together the past few years really opened my eyes to building rich apps. And I deeply apologize for using the phrase rich apps; I don't think I've ever said such Enterprisey words before.

      But yeah, things are different now. I still love Rails, and still use it for a lot of apps I build. But it's that silly rich apps phrase that's the problem. Users have way more comprehensive expectations than they did even five years ago, and the JS community does a good job at building tools and tech that tackle the problems of making heavy, complicated UI and frontend work.

      Obviously there's a lot of things happening here, so just saying "JavaScript isn't terrible" might encompass a huge amount of libraries and frameworks. But if you're like me, yeah, give things another shot- I'm somehow not hating on JavaScript anymore and... gulp... I kinda love it.

      See more
      Conor Myhrvold
      Tech Brand Mgr, Office of CTO at Uber · | 44 upvotes · 9.6M views

      How Uber developed the open source, end-to-end distributed tracing Jaeger , now a CNCF project:

      Distributed tracing is quickly becoming a must-have component in the tools that organizations use to monitor their complex, microservice-based architectures. At Uber, our open source distributed tracing system Jaeger saw large-scale internal adoption throughout 2016, integrated into hundreds of microservices and now recording thousands of traces every second.

      Here is the story of how we got here, from investigating off-the-shelf solutions like Zipkin, to why we switched from pull to push architecture, and how distributed tracing will continue to evolve:

      https://eng.uber.com/distributed-tracing/

      (GitHub Pages : https://www.jaegertracing.io/, GitHub: https://github.com/jaegertracing/jaeger)

      Bindings/Operator: Python Java Node.js Go C++ Kubernetes JavaScript OpenShift C# Apache Spark

      See more
      Git logo

      Git

      288.5K
      173.5K
      6.6K
      Fast, scalable, distributed revision control system
      288.5K
      173.5K
      + 1
      6.6K
      PROS OF GIT
      • 1.4K
        Distributed version control system
      • 1.1K
        Efficient branching and merging
      • 959
        Fast
      • 845
        Open source
      • 726
        Better than svn
      • 368
        Great command-line application
      • 306
        Simple
      • 291
        Free
      • 232
        Easy to use
      • 222
        Does not require server
      • 27
        Distributed
      • 22
        Small & Fast
      • 18
        Feature based workflow
      • 15
        Staging Area
      • 13
        Most wide-spread VSC
      • 11
        Role-based codelines
      • 11
        Disposable Experimentation
      • 7
        Frictionless Context Switching
      • 6
        Data Assurance
      • 5
        Efficient
      • 4
        Just awesome
      • 3
        Github integration
      • 3
        Easy branching and merging
      • 2
        Compatible
      • 2
        Flexible
      • 2
        Possible to lose history and commits
      • 1
        Rebase supported natively; reflog; access to plumbing
      • 1
        Light
      • 1
        Team Integration
      • 1
        Fast, scalable, distributed revision control system
      • 1
        Easy
      • 1
        Flexible, easy, Safe, and fast
      • 1
        CLI is great, but the GUI tools are awesome
      • 1
        It's what you do
      • 0
        Phinx
      CONS OF GIT
      • 16
        Hard to learn
      • 11
        Inconsistent command line interface
      • 9
        Easy to lose uncommitted work
      • 7
        Worst documentation ever possibly made
      • 5
        Awful merge handling
      • 3
        Unexistent preventive security flows
      • 3
        Rebase hell
      • 2
        When --force is disabled, cannot rebase
      • 2
        Ironically even die-hard supporters screw up badly
      • 1
        Doesn't scale for big data

      related Git posts

      Simon Reymann
      Senior Fullstack Developer at QUANTUSflow Software GmbH · | 30 upvotes · 9M views

      Our whole DevOps stack consists of the following tools:

      • GitHub (incl. GitHub Pages/Markdown for Documentation, GettingStarted and HowTo's) for collaborative review and code management tool
      • Respectively Git as revision control system
      • SourceTree as Git GUI
      • Visual Studio Code as IDE
      • CircleCI for continuous integration (automatize development process)
      • Prettier / TSLint / ESLint as code linter
      • SonarQube as quality gate
      • Docker as container management (incl. Docker Compose for multi-container application management)
      • VirtualBox for operating system simulation tests
      • Kubernetes as cluster management for docker containers
      • Heroku for deploying in test environments
      • nginx as web server (preferably used as facade server in production environment)
      • SSLMate (using OpenSSL) for certificate management
      • Amazon EC2 (incl. Amazon S3) for deploying in stage (production-like) and production environments
      • PostgreSQL as preferred database system
      • Redis as preferred in-memory database/store (great for caching)

      The main reason we have chosen Kubernetes over Docker Swarm is related to the following artifacts:

      • Key features: Easy and flexible installation, Clear dashboard, Great scaling operations, Monitoring is an integral part, Great load balancing concepts, Monitors the condition and ensures compensation in the event of failure.
      • Applications: An application can be deployed using a combination of pods, deployments, and services (or micro-services).
      • Functionality: Kubernetes as a complex installation and setup process, but it not as limited as Docker Swarm.
      • Monitoring: It supports multiple versions of logging and monitoring when the services are deployed within the cluster (Elasticsearch/Kibana (ELK), Heapster/Grafana, Sysdig cloud integration).
      • Scalability: All-in-one framework for distributed systems.
      • Other Benefits: Kubernetes is backed by the Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF), huge community among container orchestration tools, it is an open source and modular tool that works with any OS.
      See more
      Tymoteusz Paul
      Devops guy at X20X Development LTD · | 23 upvotes · 8M views

      Often enough I have to explain my way of going about setting up a CI/CD pipeline with multiple deployment platforms. Since I am a bit tired of yapping the same every single time, I've decided to write it up and share with the world this way, and send people to read it instead ;). I will explain it on "live-example" of how the Rome got built, basing that current methodology exists only of readme.md and wishes of good luck (as it usually is ;)).

      It always starts with an app, whatever it may be and reading the readmes available while Vagrant and VirtualBox is installing and updating. Following that is the first hurdle to go over - convert all the instruction/scripts into Ansible playbook(s), and only stopping when doing a clear vagrant up or vagrant reload we will have a fully working environment. As our Vagrant environment is now functional, it's time to break it! This is the moment to look for how things can be done better (too rigid/too lose versioning? Sloppy environment setup?) and replace them with the right way to do stuff, one that won't bite us in the backside. This is the point, and the best opportunity, to upcycle the existing way of doing dev environment to produce a proper, production-grade product.

      I should probably digress here for a moment and explain why. I firmly believe that the way you deploy production is the same way you should deploy develop, shy of few debugging-friendly setting. This way you avoid the discrepancy between how production work vs how development works, which almost always causes major pains in the back of the neck, and with use of proper tools should mean no more work for the developers. That's why we start with Vagrant as developer boxes should be as easy as vagrant up, but the meat of our product lies in Ansible which will do meat of the work and can be applied to almost anything: AWS, bare metal, docker, LXC, in open net, behind vpn - you name it.

      We must also give proper consideration to monitoring and logging hoovering at this point. My generic answer here is to grab Elasticsearch, Kibana, and Logstash. While for different use cases there may be better solutions, this one is well battle-tested, performs reasonably and is very easy to scale both vertically (within some limits) and horizontally. Logstash rules are easy to write and are well supported in maintenance through Ansible, which as I've mentioned earlier, are at the very core of things, and creating triggers/reports and alerts based on Elastic and Kibana is generally a breeze, including some quite complex aggregations.

      If we are happy with the state of the Ansible it's time to move on and put all those roles and playbooks to work. Namely, we need something to manage our CI/CD pipelines. For me, the choice is obvious: TeamCity. It's modern, robust and unlike most of the light-weight alternatives, it's transparent. What I mean by that is that it doesn't tell you how to do things, doesn't limit your ways to deploy, or test, or package for that matter. Instead, it provides a developer-friendly and rich playground for your pipelines. You can do most the same with Jenkins, but it has a quite dated look and feel to it, while also missing some key functionality that must be brought in via plugins (like quality REST API which comes built-in with TeamCity). It also comes with all the common-handy plugins like Slack or Apache Maven integration.

      The exact flow between CI and CD varies too greatly from one application to another to describe, so I will outline a few rules that guide me in it: 1. Make build steps as small as possible. This way when something breaks, we know exactly where, without needing to dig and root around. 2. All security credentials besides development environment must be sources from individual Vault instances. Keys to those containers should exist only on the CI/CD box and accessible by a few people (the less the better). This is pretty self-explanatory, as anything besides dev may contain sensitive data and, at times, be public-facing. Because of that appropriate security must be present. TeamCity shines in this department with excellent secrets-management. 3. Every part of the build chain shall consume and produce artifacts. If it creates nothing, it likely shouldn't be its own build. This way if any issue shows up with any environment or version, all developer has to do it is grab appropriate artifacts to reproduce the issue locally. 4. Deployment builds should be directly tied to specific Git branches/tags. This enables much easier tracking of what caused an issue, including automated identifying and tagging the author (nothing like automated regression testing!).

      Speaking of deployments, I generally try to keep it simple but also with a close eye on the wallet. Because of that, I am more than happy with AWS or another cloud provider, but also constantly peeking at the loads and do we get the value of what we are paying for. Often enough the pattern of use is not constantly erratic, but rather has a firm baseline which could be migrated away from the cloud and into bare metal boxes. That is another part where this approach strongly triumphs over the common Docker and CircleCI setup, where you are very much tied in to use cloud providers and getting out is expensive. Here to embrace bare-metal hosting all you need is a help of some container-based self-hosting software, my personal preference is with Proxmox and LXC. Following that all you must write are ansible scripts to manage hardware of Proxmox, similar way as you do for Amazon EC2 (ansible supports both greatly) and you are good to go. One does not exclude another, quite the opposite, as they can live in great synergy and cut your costs dramatically (the heavier your base load, the bigger the savings) while providing production-grade resiliency.

      See more