Alternatives to Azure Functions logo

Alternatives to Azure Functions

AWS Lambda, Kubernetes, Serverless, Apex, and Google Cloud Functions are the most popular alternatives and competitors to Azure Functions.
782
689
+ 1
62

What is Azure Functions and what are its top alternatives?

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 Functions is a tool in the Serverless / Task Processing category of a tech stack.

Top Alternatives to Azure Functions

  • AWS Lambda
    AWS Lambda

    AWS Lambda is a compute service that runs your code in response to events and automatically manages the underlying compute resources for you. You can use AWS Lambda to extend other AWS services with custom logic, or create your own back-end services that operate at AWS scale, performance, and security. ...

  • 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. ...

  • Serverless
    Serverless

    Build applications comprised of microservices that run in response to events, auto-scale for you, and only charge you when they run. This lowers the total cost of maintaining your apps, enabling you to build more logic, faster. The Framework uses new event-driven compute services, like AWS Lambda, Google CloudFunctions, and more. ...

  • Apex
    Apex

    Apex is a small tool for deploying and managing AWS Lambda functions. With shims for languages not yet supported by Lambda, you can use Golang out of the box. ...

  • Google Cloud Functions
    Google Cloud Functions

    Construct applications from bite-sized business logic billed to the nearest 100 milliseconds, only while your code is running ...

  • Cloud Functions for Firebase
    Cloud Functions for Firebase

    Cloud Functions for Firebase lets you create functions that are triggered by Firebase products, such as changes to data in the Realtime Database, uploads to Cloud Storage, new user sign ups via Authentication, and conversion events in Analytics. ...

  • Effe
    Effe

    Effe is an extremely simple building block with which to build a "server-less" architecture. This is a building block, operates on the level of a single lambda function. ...

  • Google Cloud Run
    Google Cloud Run

    A managed compute platform that enables you to run stateless containers that are invocable via HTTP requests. It's serverless by abstracting away all infrastructure management. ...

Azure Functions alternatives & related posts

AWS Lambda logo

AWS Lambda

25.4K
18.3K
432
Automatically run code in response to modifications to objects in Amazon S3 buckets, messages in Kinesis streams, or...
25.4K
18.3K
+ 1
432
PROS OF AWS LAMBDA
  • 129
    No infrastructure
  • 83
    Cheap
  • 70
    Quick
  • 59
    Stateless
  • 47
    No deploy, no server, great sleep
  • 12
    AWS Lambda went down taking many sites with it
  • 6
    Event Driven Governance
  • 6
    Extensive API
  • 6
    Auto scale and cost effective
  • 6
    Easy to deploy
  • 5
    VPC Support
  • 3
    Integrated with various AWS services
CONS OF AWS LAMBDA
  • 7
    Cant execute ruby or go
  • 3
    Compute time limited
  • 1
    Can't execute PHP w/o significant effort

related AWS Lambda posts

Jeyabalaji Subramanian

Recently we were looking at a few robust and cost-effective ways of replicating the data that resides in our production MongoDB to a PostgreSQL database for data warehousing and business intelligence.

We set ourselves the following criteria for the optimal tool that would do this job: - The data replication must be near real-time, yet it should NOT impact the production database - The data replication must be horizontally scalable (based on the load), asynchronous & crash-resilient

Based on the above criteria, we selected the following tools to perform the end to end data replication:

We chose MongoDB Stitch for picking up the changes in the source database. It is the serverless platform from MongoDB. One of the services offered by MongoDB Stitch is Stitch Triggers. Using stitch triggers, you can execute a serverless function (in Node.js) in real time in response to changes in the database. When there are a lot of database changes, Stitch automatically "feeds forward" these changes through an asynchronous queue.

We chose Amazon SQS as the pipe / message backbone for communicating the changes from MongoDB to our own replication service. Interestingly enough, MongoDB stitch offers integration with AWS services.

In the Node.js function, we wrote minimal functionality to communicate the database changes (insert / update / delete / replace) to Amazon SQS.

Next we wrote a minimal micro-service in Python to listen to the message events on SQS, pickup the data payload & mirror the DB changes on to the target Data warehouse. We implemented source data to target data translation by modelling target table structures through SQLAlchemy . We deployed this micro-service as AWS Lambda with Zappa. With Zappa, deploying your services as event-driven & horizontally scalable Lambda service is dumb-easy.

In the end, we got to implement a highly scalable near realtime Change Data Replication service that "works" and deployed to production in a matter of few days!

See more
Tim Nolet

Heroku Docker GitHub Node.js hapi Vue.js AWS Lambda Amazon S3 PostgreSQL Knex.js Checkly is a fairly young company and we're still working hard to find the correct mix of product features, price and audience.

We are focussed on tech B2B, but I always wanted to serve solo developers too. So I decided to make a $7 plan.

Why $7? Simply put, it seems to be a sweet spot for tech companies: Heroku, Docker, Github, Appoptics (Librato) all offer $7 plans. They must have done a ton of research into this, so why not piggy back that and try it out.

Enough biz talk, onto tech. The challenges were:

  • Slice of a portion of the functionality so a $7 plan is still profitable. We call this the "plan limits"
  • Update API and back end services to handle and enforce plan limits.
  • Update the UI to kindly state plan limits are in effect on some part of the UI.
  • Update the pricing page to reflect all changes.
  • Keep the actual processing backend, storage and API's as untouched as possible.

In essence, we went from strictly volume based pricing to value based pricing. Here come the technical steps & decisions we made to get there.

  1. We updated our PostgreSQL schema so plans now have an array of "features". These are string constants that represent feature toggles.
  2. The Vue.js frontend reads these from the vuex store on login.
  3. Based on these values, the UI has simple v-if statements to either just show the feature or show a friendly "please upgrade" button.
  4. The hapi API has a hook on each relevant API endpoint that checks whether a user's plan has the feature enabled, or not.

Side note: We offer 10 SMS messages per month on the developer plan. However, we were not actually counting how many people were sending. We had to update our alerting daemon (that runs on Heroku and triggers SMS messages via AWS SNS) to actually bump a counter.

What we build is basically feature-toggling based on plan features. It is very extensible for future additions. Our scheduling and storage backend that actually runs users' monitoring requests (AWS Lambda) and stores the results (S3 and Postgres) has no knowledge of all of this and remained unchanged.

Hope this helps anyone building out their SaaS and is in a similar situation.

See more
Kubernetes logo

Kubernetes

58.7K
50.4K
677
Manage a cluster of Linux containers as a single system to accelerate Dev and simplify Ops
58.7K
50.4K
+ 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 · 9.5M 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
Yshay Yaacobi

Our first experience with .NET core was when we developed our OSS feature management platform - Tweek (https://github.com/soluto/tweek). We wanted to create a solution that is able to run anywhere (super important for OSS), has excellent performance characteristics and can fit in a multi-container architecture. We decided to implement our rule engine processor in F# , our main service was implemented in C# and other components were built using JavaScript / TypeScript and Go.

Visual Studio Code worked really well for us as well, it worked well with all our polyglot services and the .Net core integration had great cross-platform developer experience (to be fair, F# was a bit trickier) - actually, each of our team members used a different OS (Ubuntu, macos, windows). Our production deployment ran for a time on Docker Swarm until we've decided to adopt Kubernetes with almost seamless migration process.

After our positive experience of running .Net core workloads in containers and developing Tweek's .Net services on non-windows machines, C# had gained back some of its popularity (originally lost to Node.js), and other teams have been using it for developing microservices, k8s sidecars (like https://github.com/Soluto/airbag), cli tools, serverless functions and other projects...

See more
Serverless logo

Serverless

2.2K
1.2K
26
The most widely-adopted toolkit for building serverless applications
2.2K
1.2K
+ 1
26
PROS OF SERVERLESS
  • 14
    API integration
  • 7
    Supports cloud functions for Google, Azure, and IBM
  • 3
    Lower cost
  • 1
    Auto scale
  • 1
    Openwhisk
CONS OF SERVERLESS
    Be the first to leave a con

    related Serverless posts

    Praveen Mooli
    Engineering Manager at Taylor and Francis · | 18 upvotes · 3.8M views

    We are in the process of building a modern content platform to deliver our content through various channels. We decided to go with Microservices architecture as we wanted scale. Microservice architecture style is an approach to developing an application as a suite of small independently deployable services built around specific business capabilities. You can gain modularity, extensive parallelism and cost-effective scaling by deploying services across many distributed servers. Microservices modularity facilitates independent updates/deployments, and helps to avoid single point of failure, which can help prevent large-scale outages. We also decided to use Event Driven Architecture pattern which is a popular distributed asynchronous architecture pattern used to produce highly scalable applications. The event-driven architecture is made up of highly decoupled, single-purpose event processing components that asynchronously receive and process events.

    To build our #Backend capabilities we decided to use the following: 1. #Microservices - Java with Spring Boot , Node.js with ExpressJS and Python with Flask 2. #Eventsourcingframework - Amazon Kinesis , Amazon Kinesis Firehose , Amazon SNS , Amazon SQS, AWS Lambda 3. #Data - Amazon RDS , Amazon DynamoDB , Amazon S3 , MongoDB Atlas

    To build #Webapps we decided to use Angular 2 with RxJS

    #Devops - GitHub , Travis CI , Terraform , Docker , Serverless

    See more
    Nitzan Shapira

    At Epsagon, we use hundreds of AWS Lambda functions, most of them are written in Python, and the Serverless Framework to pack and deploy them. One of the issues we've encountered is the difficulty to package external libraries into the Lambda environment using the Serverless Framework. This limitation is probably by design since the external code your Lambda needs can be usually included with a package manager.

    In order to overcome this issue, we've developed a tool, which we also published as open-source (see link below), which automatically packs these libraries using a simple npm package and a YAML configuration file. Support for Node.js, Go, and Java will be available soon.

    The GitHub respoitory: https://github.com/epsagon/serverless-package-external

    See more
    Apex logo

    Apex

    487
    113
    0
    Serverless Architecture with AWS Lambda
    487
    113
    + 1
    0
    PROS OF APEX
      Be the first to leave a pro
      CONS OF APEX
        Be the first to leave a con

        related Apex posts

        Google Cloud Functions logo

        Google Cloud Functions

        479
        471
        25
        A serverless environment to build and connect cloud services
        479
        471
        + 1
        25
        PROS OF GOOGLE CLOUD FUNCTIONS
        • 7
          Serverless Applications
        • 5
          Its not AWS
        • 4
          Simplicity
        • 3
          Free Tiers and Trainging
        • 2
          Simple config with GitLab CI/CD
        • 1
          Built-in Webhook trigger
        • 1
          Typescript Support
        • 1
          Blaze, pay as you go
        • 1
          Customer Support
        CONS OF GOOGLE CLOUD FUNCTIONS
        • 1
          Node.js only
        • 0
          Typescript Support
        • 0
          Blaze, pay as you go

        related Google Cloud Functions posts

        Kestas Barzdaitis
        Entrepreneur & Engineer · | 16 upvotes · 762.1K 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
        Tim Nolet

        AWS Lambda Serverless Amazon CloudWatch Azure Functions Google Cloud Functions Node.js

        In the last year or so, I moved all Checkly monitoring workloads to AWS Lambda. Here are some stats:

        • We run three core functions in all AWS regions. They handle API checks, browser checks and setup / teardown scripts. Check our docs to find out what that means.
        • All functions are hooked up to SNS topics but can also be triggered directly through AWS SDK calls.
        • The busiest function is a plumbing function that forwards data to our database. It is invoked anywhere between 7000 and 10.000 times per hour with an average duration of about 179 ms.
        • We run separate dev and test versions of each function in each region.

        Moving all this to AWS Lambda took some work and considerations. The blog post linked below goes into the following topics:

        • Why Lambda is an almost perfect match for SaaS. Especially when you're small.
        • Why I don't use a "big" framework around it.
        • Why distributed background jobs triggered by queues are Lambda's raison d'être.
        • Why monitoring & logging is still an issue.

        https://blog.checklyhq.com/how-i-made-aws-lambda-work-for-my-saas/

        See more
        Cloud Functions for Firebase logo

        Cloud Functions for Firebase

        469
        392
        6
        Run your mobile backend code without managing servers
        469
        392
        + 1
        6
        PROS OF CLOUD FUNCTIONS FOR FIREBASE
        • 4
          Up and running
        • 1
          Multi-region
        • 1
          Affordable
        CONS OF CLOUD FUNCTIONS FOR FIREBASE
          Be the first to leave a con

          related Cloud Functions for Firebase posts

          Eugene Cheah

          For inboxkitten.com, an opensource disposable email service;

          We migrated our serverless workload from Cloud Functions for Firebase to CloudFlare workers, taking advantage of the lower cost and faster-performing edge computing of Cloudflare network. Made possible due to our extremely low CPU and RAM overhead of our serverless functions.

          If I were to summarize the limitation of Cloudflare (as oppose to firebase/gcp functions), it would be ...

          1. <5ms CPU time limit
          2. Incompatible with express.js
          3. one script limitation per domain

          Limitations our workload is able to conform with (YMMV)

          For hosting of static files, we migrated from Firebase to CommonsHost

          More details on the trade-off in between both serverless providers is in the article

          See more
          Aliadoc Team

          In #Aliadoc, we're exploring the crowdfunding option to get traction before launch. We are building a SaaS platform for website design customization.

          For the Admin UI and website editor we use React and we're currently transitioning from a Create React App setup to a custom one because our needs have become more specific. We use CloudFlare as much as possible, it's a great service.

          For routing dynamic resources and proxy tasks to feed websites to the editor we leverage CloudFlare Workers for improved responsiveness. We use Firebase for our hosting needs and user authentication while also using several Cloud Functions for Firebase to interact with other services along with Google App Engine and Google Cloud Storage, but also the Real Time Database is on the radar for collaborative website editing.

          We generally hate configuration but honestly because of the stage of our project we lack resources for doing heavy sysops work. So we are basically just relying on Serverless technologies as much as we can to do all server side processing.

          Visual Studio Code definitively makes programming a much easier and enjoyable task, we just love it. We combine it with Bitbucket for our source code control needs.

          See more
          Effe logo

          Effe

          374
          11
          0
          A building block for an open source AWS lambda
          374
          11
          + 1
          0
          PROS OF EFFE
            Be the first to leave a pro
            CONS OF EFFE
              Be the first to leave a con

              related Effe posts

              Google Cloud Run logo

              Google Cloud Run

              274
              229
              62
              Run stateless HTTP containers on a fully managed environment or in your own GKE cluster
              274
              229
              + 1
              62
              PROS OF GOOGLE CLOUD RUN
              • 11
                HTTPS endpoints
              • 10
                Fully managed
              • 10
                Pay per use
              • 7
                Concurrency: multiple requests sent to each container
              • 7
                Deploy containers
              • 7
                Serverless
              • 6
                Custom domains with auto SSL
              • 4
                "Invoke IAM permission" to manage authentication
              • 0
                Cons
              CONS OF GOOGLE CLOUD RUN
                Be the first to leave a con

                related Google Cloud Run posts

                I use Google Cloud Run because it's like bring your own docker image to Google Cloud Functions.

                I use it for building Dash Apps

                It creates a nice url for web apps, and I see it being the evolution of serverless if GCP can scale this up.

                My Real-Time Python App Example

                See more

                What are the best options to host a Spring Boot application that acts as a receiver and publisher from Google Cloud Pub/Sub. I am using Google App Engine to do that, but there is Google Cloud Dataflow and Google Cloud Run that can be used. Which is the best option that can be used for this purpose and also that can handle the failover scenarios as well. Thanks!

                See more