Alternatives to Google Kubernetes Engine logo

Alternatives to Google Kubernetes Engine

Google App Engine, Red Hat OpenShift, Google Compute Engine, Kubernetes, and Git are the most popular alternatives and competitors to Google Kubernetes Engine.
1.1K
810
+ 1
78

What is Google Kubernetes Engine and what are its top alternatives?

Google Kubernetes Engine (GKE) is a managed Kubernetes service offered by Google Cloud Platform. It allows users to deploy, manage, and scale containerized applications using Kubernetes on Google's infrastructure. Key features include automatic scaling, monitoring, logging, and integration with other Google Cloud services. However, some limitations of GKE include pricing based on resource usage and potentially complex networking configurations for certain use cases.

  1. Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service (EKS): Amazon EKS is a managed Kubernetes service that allows you to easily deploy, manage, and scale containerized applications using Kubernetes on AWS. Key features include seamless integration with other AWS services, high availability, and automatic updates. Pros of EKS compared to GKE include tighter integration with AWS services, while cons include potentially higher costs and steeper learning curve for AWS-specific features.
  2. Microsoft Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS): Azure AKS is a managed Kubernetes service on Microsoft Azure designed to simplify the process of deploying, managing, and scaling containerized applications using Kubernetes. Key features include seamless integration with Azure services, automatic scaling, and security monitoring. Pros of AKS compared to GKE include deep integration with Azure services, while cons include possible limitations in advanced networking features.
  3. Rancher: Rancher is an open-source container management platform that supports Kubernetes for managing and orchestrating containers across multiple environments. Key features include centralized management, multi-cluster support, and advanced networking options. Pros of Rancher compared to GKE include flexibility in managing multiple clusters, while cons include self-hosted setup and maintenance overhead.
  4. Red Hat OpenShift: Red Hat OpenShift is a Kubernetes-based container platform that provides automation and orchestration for deploying applications in containers. Key features include developer-friendly tools, built-in security capabilities, and support for hybrid cloud environments. Pros of OpenShift compared to GKE include enterprise-grade features, while cons include potential complexity in setup and management.
  5. D2iQ Kaptain: D2iQ Kaptain is a Kubernetes-based platform that enables simplified deployment, scaling, and continuous delivery of containerized applications. Key features include application lifecycle management, observability tools, and automated operations. Pros of Kaptain compared to GKE include advanced automation capabilities, while cons include possible complexity in configuration for certain use cases.
  6. VMware Tanzu Kubernetes Grid: Tanzu Kubernetes Grid is a Kubernetes runtime that simplifies the deployment and management of Kubernetes across multiple environments. Key features include support for multi-cloud deployments, automated upgrades, and streamlined operations. Pros of Tanzu Kubernetes Grid compared to GKE include compatibility with VMware ecosystem, while cons may include specialized knowledge required for VMware integration.
  7. DigitalOcean Kubernetes: DigitalOcean Kubernetes is a managed Kubernetes service that enables developers to deploy, manage, and scale containerized applications using Kubernetes. Key features include simplified setup, seamless integration with DigitalOcean services, and transparent pricing. Pros of DigitalOcean Kubernetes compared to GKE include simplicity and cost-effectiveness, while potential cons include limited scalability options for complex deployments.
  8. IBM Cloud Kubernetes Service: IBM Cloud Kubernetes Service is a managed Kubernetes offering on IBM Cloud that provides a secure and scalable platform for deploying containerized applications. Key features include enterprise-grade security, integration with IBM Cloud services, and support for hybrid cloud environments. Pros of IBM Cloud Kubernetes Service compared to GKE include IBM's enterprise support, while cons may include pricing based on usage and potential complexity in integration with non-IBM services.
  9. KubeSphere: KubeSphere is an open-source Kubernetes platform that simplifies the management of containerized workloads and supports multi-tenant and multi-cluster deployments. Key features include a user-friendly interface, integrated DevOps tools, and application marketplace. Pros of KubeSphere compared to GKE include open-source community support, while cons may include limitations in enterprise-grade features and support.
  10. Canonical Kubernetes: Canonical Kubernetes is a distribution of Kubernetes built by Canonical, the company behind Ubuntu Linux. Key features include optimization for Ubuntu and other Debian-based systems, ease of installation, and support for both on-premises and cloud deployments. Pros of Canonical Kubernetes compared to GKE include compatibility with Ubuntu ecosystem, while potential cons may include specific expertise needed for customization and maintenance.

Top Alternatives to Google Kubernetes Engine

  • 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. ...

  • Red Hat OpenShift
    Red Hat OpenShift

    OpenShift is Red Hat's Cloud Computing Platform as a Service (PaaS) offering. OpenShift is an application platform in the cloud where application developers and teams can build, test, deploy, and run their applications. ...

  • Google Compute Engine
    Google Compute Engine

    Google Compute Engine is a service that provides virtual machines that run on Google infrastructure. Google Compute Engine offers scale, performance, and value that allows you to easily launch large compute clusters on Google's infrastructure. There are no upfront investments and you can run up to thousands of virtual CPUs on a system that has been designed from the ground up to be fast, and to offer strong consistency of performance. ...

  • 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. ...

  • 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. ...

  • GitHub
    GitHub

    GitHub is the best place to share code with friends, co-workers, classmates, and complete strangers. Over three million people use GitHub to build amazing things together. ...

  • Visual Studio Code
    Visual Studio Code

    Build and debug modern web and cloud applications. Code is free and available on your favorite platform - Linux, Mac OSX, and Windows. ...

  • Docker
    Docker

    The Docker Platform is the industry-leading container platform for continuous, high-velocity innovation, enabling organizations to seamlessly build and share any application — from legacy to what comes next — and securely run them anywhere ...

Google Kubernetes Engine alternatives & related posts

Google App Engine logo

Google App Engine

10.2K
611
Build web applications on the same scalable systems that power Google applications
10.2K
611
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
  • 5
    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
    No Ops
  • 2
    Mostly up
CONS OF GOOGLE APP ENGINE
    Be the first to leave a con

    related Google App Engine posts

    Nick Rockwell
    SVP, Engineering at Fastly · | 12 upvotes · 435.3K 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
    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
    Red Hat OpenShift logo

    Red Hat OpenShift

    1.5K
    517
    Red Hat's free Platform as a Service (PaaS) for hosting Java, PHP, Ruby, Python, Node.js, and Perl apps
    1.5K
    517
    PROS OF RED HAT OPENSHIFT
    • 99
      Good free plan
    • 63
      Open Source
    • 47
      Easy setup
    • 43
      Nodejs support
    • 42
      Well documented
    • 32
      Custom domains
    • 28
      Mongodb support
    • 27
      Clean and simple architecture
    • 25
      PHP support
    • 21
      Customizable environments
    • 11
      Ability to run CRON jobs
    • 9
      Easier than Heroku for a WordPress blog
    • 8
      Easy deployment
    • 7
      PostgreSQL support
    • 7
      Autoscaling
    • 7
      Good balance between Heroku and AWS for flexibility
    • 5
      Free, Easy Setup, Lot of Gear or D.I.Y Gear
    • 4
      Shell access to gears
    • 3
      Great Support
    • 3
      High Security
    • 3
      Logging & Metrics
    • 2
      Cloud Agnostic
    • 2
      Runs Anywhere - AWS, GCP, Azure
    • 2
      No credit card needed
    • 2
      Because it is easy to manage
    • 2
      Secure
    • 2
      Meteor support
    • 2
      Overly complicated and over engineered in majority of e
    • 2
      Golang support
    • 2
      Its free and offer custom domain usage
    • 1
      Autoscaling at a good price point
    • 1
      Easy setup and great customer support
    • 1
      MultiCloud
    • 1
      Great free plan with excellent support
    • 1
      This is the only free one among the three as of today
    CONS OF RED HAT OPENSHIFT
    • 2
      Decisions are made for you, limiting your options
    • 2
      License cost
    • 1
      Behind, sometimes severely, the upstreams

    related Red Hat OpenShift posts

    Conor Myhrvold
    Tech Brand Mgr, Office of CTO at Uber · | 44 upvotes · 13M 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
    Michael Ionita

    We use Kubernetes because we decided to migrate to a hosted cluster (not AWS) and still be able to scale our clusters up and down depending on load. By wrapping it with OpenShift we are now able to easily adapt to demand but also able to separate concerns into separate Pods depending on use-cases we have.

    See more
    Google Compute Engine logo

    Google Compute Engine

    12.3K
    423
    Run large-scale workloads on virtual machines hosted on Google's infrastructure.
    12.3K
    423
    PROS OF GOOGLE COMPUTE ENGINE
    • 87
      Backed by google
    • 79
      Easy to scale
    • 75
      High-performance virtual machines
    • 57
      Performance
    • 52
      Fast and easy provisioning
    • 15
      Load balancing
    • 12
      Compliance and security
    • 9
      Kubernetes
    • 8
      GitHub Integration
    • 7
      Consistency
    • 4
      Free $300 credit (12 months)
    • 3
      One Click Setup Options
    • 3
      Good documentation
    • 2
      Great integration and product support
    • 2
      Escort
    • 2
      Ease of Use and GitHub support
    • 1
      Nice UI
    • 1
      Easy Snapshot and Backup feature
    • 1
      Integration with mobile notification services
    • 1
      Low cost
    • 1
      Support many OS
    • 1
      Very Reliable
    CONS OF GOOGLE COMPUTE ENGINE
      Be the first to leave a con

      related Google Compute Engine posts

      Context: I wanted to create an end to end IoT data pipeline simulation in Google Cloud IoT Core and other GCP services. I never touched Terraform meaningfully until working on this project, and it's one of the best explorations in my development career. The documentation and syntax is incredibly human-readable and friendly. I'm used to building infrastructure through the google apis via Python , but I'm so glad past Sung did not make that decision. I was tempted to use Google Cloud Deployment Manager, but the templates were a bit convoluted by first impression. I'm glad past Sung did not make this decision either.

      Solution: Leveraging Google Cloud Build Google Cloud Run Google Cloud Bigtable Google BigQuery Google Cloud Storage Google Compute Engine along with some other fun tools, I can deploy over 40 GCP resources using Terraform!

      Check Out My Architecture: CLICK ME

      Check out the GitHub repo attached

      See more
      Jeyabalaji Subramanian

      At FundsCorner, we are on a mission to enable fast accessible credit to India’s Kirana Stores. We are an early stage startup with an ultra small Engineering team. All the tech decisions we have made until now are based on our core philosophy: "Build usable products fast".

      Based on the above fundamentals, we chose Python as our base language for all our APIs and micro-services. It is ultra easy to start with, yet provides great libraries even for the most complex of use cases. Our entire backend stack runs on Python and we cannot be more happy with it! If you are looking to deploy your API as server-less, Python provides one of the least cold start times.

      We build our APIs with Flask. For backend database, our natural choice was MongoDB. It frees up our time from complex database specifications - we instead use our time in doing sensible data modelling & once we finalize the data model, we integrate it into Flask using Swagger UI. Mongo supports complex queries to cull out difficult data through aggregation framework & we have even built an internal framework called "Poetry", for aggregation queries.

      Our web apps are built on Vue.js , Vuetify and vuex. Initially we debated a lot around choosing Vue.js or React , but finally settled with Vue.js, mainly because of the ease of use, fast development cycles & awesome set of libraries and utilities backing Vue.

      You simply cannot go wrong with Vue.js . Great documentation, the library is ultra compact & is blazing fast. Choosing Vue.js was one of the critical decisions made, which enabled us to launch our web app in under a month (which otherwise would have taken 3 months easily). For those folks who are looking for big names, Adobe, and Alibaba and Gitlab are using Vue.

      By choosing Vuetify, we saved thousands of person hours in designing the CSS files. Vuetify contains all key material components for designing a smooth User experience & it just works! It's an awesome framework. All of us at FundsCorner are now lifelong fanboys of Vue.js and Vuetify.

      On the infrastructure side, all our API services and backend services are deployed as server less micro-services through Zappa. Zappa makes your life super easy by packaging everything that is required to deploy your code as AWS Lambda. We are now addicted to the single - click deploys / updates through Zappa. Try it out & you will convert!

      Also, if you are using Zappa, you can greatly simplify your CI / CD pipelines. Do try it! It's just awesome! and... you will be astonished by the savings you have made on AWS bills at end of the month.

      Our CI / CD pipelines are built using GitLab CI. The documentation is very good & it enables you to go from from concept to production in minimal time frame.

      We use Sentry for all crash reporting and resolution. Pro tip, they do have handlers for AWS Lambda , which made our integration super easy.

      All our micro-services including APIs are event-driven. Our background micro-services are message oriented & we use Amazon SQS as our message pipe. We have our own in-house workflow manager to orchestrate across micro - services.

      We host our static websites on Netlify. One of the cool things about Netlify is the automated CI / CD on git push. You just do a git push to deploy! Again, it is super simple to use and it just works. We were dogmatic about going server less even on static web sites & you can go server less on Netlify in a few minutes. It's just a few clicks away.

      We use Google Compute Engine, especially Google Vision for our AI experiments.

      For Ops automation, we use Slack. Slack provides a super-rich API (through Slack App) through which you can weave magical automation on boring ops tasks.

      See more
      Kubernetes logo

      Kubernetes

      60K
      681
      Manage a cluster of Linux containers as a single system to accelerate Dev and simplify Ops
      60K
      681
      PROS OF KUBERNETES
      • 166
        Leading docker container management solution
      • 129
        Simple and powerful
      • 107
        Open source
      • 76
        Backed by google
      • 58
        The right abstractions
      • 25
        Scale services
      • 20
        Replication controller
      • 11
        Permission managment
      • 9
        Supports autoscaling
      • 8
        Simple
      • 8
        Cheap
      • 6
        Self-healing
      • 5
        Open, powerful, stable
      • 5
        Reliable
      • 5
        No cloud platform lock-in
      • 5
        Promotes modern/good infrascture practice
      • 4
        Scalable
      • 4
        Quick cloud setup
      • 3
        Custom and extensibility
      • 3
        Captain of Container Ship
      • 3
        Cloud Agnostic
      • 3
        Backed by Red Hat
      • 3
        Runs on azure
      • 3
        A self healing environment with rich metadata
      • 2
        Everything of CaaS
      • 2
        Gke
      • 2
        Golang
      • 2
        Easy setup
      • 2
        Expandable
      • 2
        Sfg
      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 · 13M 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
      Git logo

      Git

      298.3K
      6.6K
      Fast, scalable, distributed revision control system
      298.3K
      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
      • 28
        Distributed
      • 23
        Small & Fast
      • 18
        Feature based workflow
      • 15
        Staging Area
      • 13
        Most wide-spread VSC
      • 11
        Disposable Experimentation
      • 11
        Role-based codelines
      • 7
        Frictionless Context Switching
      • 6
        Data Assurance
      • 5
        Efficient
      • 4
        Just awesome
      • 3
        Easy branching and merging
      • 3
        Github integration
      • 2
        Compatible
      • 2
        Possible to lose history and commits
      • 2
        Flexible
      • 1
        Team Integration
      • 1
        Easy
      • 1
        Light
      • 1
        Fast, scalable, distributed revision control system
      • 1
        Rebase supported natively; reflog; access to plumbing
      • 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
      • 8
        Worst documentation ever possibly made
      • 5
        Awful merge handling
      • 3
        Unexistent preventive security flows
      • 3
        Rebase hell
      • 2
        Ironically even die-hard supporters screw up badly
      • 2
        When --force is disabled, cannot rebase
      • 1
        Doesn't scale for big data

      related Git posts

      Simon Reymann
      Senior Fullstack Developer at QUANTUSflow Software GmbH · | 30 upvotes · 11.7M 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 · 10M 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
      GitHub logo

      GitHub

      287K
      10.3K
      Powerful collaboration, review, and code management for open source and private development projects
      287K
      10.3K
      PROS OF GITHUB
      • 1.8K
        Open source friendly
      • 1.5K
        Easy source control
      • 1.3K
        Nice UI
      • 1.1K
        Great for team collaboration
      • 868
        Easy setup
      • 504
        Issue tracker
      • 487
        Great community
      • 483
        Remote team collaboration
      • 449
        Great way to share
      • 442
        Pull request and features planning
      • 147
        Just works
      • 132
        Integrated in many tools
      • 122
        Free Public Repos
      • 116
        Github Gists
      • 113
        Github pages
      • 83
        Easy to find repos
      • 62
        Open source
      • 60
        Easy to find projects
      • 60
        It's free
      • 56
        Network effect
      • 49
        Extensive API
      • 43
        Organizations
      • 42
        Branching
      • 34
        Developer Profiles
      • 32
        Git Powered Wikis
      • 30
        Great for collaboration
      • 24
        It's fun
      • 23
        Clean interface and good integrations
      • 22
        Community SDK involvement
      • 20
        Learn from others source code
      • 16
        Because: Git
      • 14
        It integrates directly with Azure
      • 10
        Standard in Open Source collab
      • 10
        Newsfeed
      • 8
        Fast
      • 8
        Beautiful user experience
      • 8
        It integrates directly with Hipchat
      • 7
        Easy to discover new code libraries
      • 6
        It's awesome
      • 6
        Smooth integration
      • 6
        Cloud SCM
      • 6
        Nice API
      • 6
        Graphs
      • 6
        Integrations
      • 5
        Hands down best online Git service available
      • 5
        Reliable
      • 5
        Quick Onboarding
      • 5
        CI Integration
      • 5
        Remarkable uptime
      • 4
        Security options
      • 4
        Loved by developers
      • 4
        Uses GIT
      • 4
        Free HTML hosting
      • 4
        Easy to use and collaborate with others
      • 4
        Version Control
      • 4
        Simple but powerful
      • 4
        Unlimited Public Repos at no cost
      • 3
        Nice to use
      • 3
        IAM
      • 3
        Ci
      • 3
        Easy deployment via SSH
      • 2
        Free private repos
      • 2
        Good tools support
      • 2
        All in one development service
      • 2
        Never dethroned
      • 2
        Easy source control and everything is backed up
      • 2
        Issues tracker
      • 2
        Self Hosted
      • 2
        IAM integration
      • 2
        Very Easy to Use
      • 2
        Easy to use
      • 2
        Leads the copycats
      • 2
        Free HTML hostings
      • 2
        Easy and efficient maintainance of the projects
      • 2
        Beautiful
      • 1
        Dasf
      • 1
        Profound
      CONS OF GITHUB
      • 55
        Owned by micrcosoft
      • 38
        Expensive for lone developers that want private repos
      • 15
        Relatively slow product/feature release cadence
      • 10
        API scoping could be better
      • 9
        Only 3 collaborators for private repos
      • 4
        Limited featureset for issue management
      • 3
        Does not have a graph for showing history like git lens
      • 2
        GitHub Packages does not support SNAPSHOT versions
      • 1
        No multilingual interface
      • 1
        Takes a long time to commit
      • 1
        Expensive

      related GitHub posts

      Johnny Bell

      I was building a personal project that I needed to store items in a real time database. I am more comfortable with my Frontend skills than my backend so I didn't want to spend time building out anything in Ruby or Go.

      I stumbled on Firebase by #Google, and it was really all I needed. It had realtime data, an area for storing file uploads and best of all for the amount of data I needed it was free!

      I built out my application using tools I was familiar with, React for the framework, Redux.js to manage my state across components, and styled-components for the styling.

      Now as this was a project I was just working on in my free time for fun I didn't really want to pay for hosting. I did some research and I found Netlify. I had actually seen them at #ReactRally the year before and deployed a Gatsby site to Netlify already.

      Netlify was very easy to setup and link to my GitHub account you select a repo and pretty much with very little configuration you have a live site that will deploy every time you push to master.

      With the selection of these tools I was able to build out my application, connect it to a realtime database, and deploy to a live environment all with $0 spent.

      If you're looking to build out a small app I suggest giving these tools a go as you can get your idea out into the real world for absolutely no cost.

      See more

      Context: I wanted to create an end to end IoT data pipeline simulation in Google Cloud IoT Core and other GCP services. I never touched Terraform meaningfully until working on this project, and it's one of the best explorations in my development career. The documentation and syntax is incredibly human-readable and friendly. I'm used to building infrastructure through the google apis via Python , but I'm so glad past Sung did not make that decision. I was tempted to use Google Cloud Deployment Manager, but the templates were a bit convoluted by first impression. I'm glad past Sung did not make this decision either.

      Solution: Leveraging Google Cloud Build Google Cloud Run Google Cloud Bigtable Google BigQuery Google Cloud Storage Google Compute Engine along with some other fun tools, I can deploy over 40 GCP resources using Terraform!

      Check Out My Architecture: CLICK ME

      Check out the GitHub repo attached

      See more
      Visual Studio Code logo

      Visual Studio Code

      180.3K
      2.3K
      Build and debug modern web and cloud applications, by Microsoft
      180.3K
      2.3K
      PROS OF VISUAL STUDIO CODE
      • 340
        Powerful multilanguage IDE
      • 308
        Fast
      • 193
        Front-end develop out of the box
      • 158
        Support TypeScript IntelliSense
      • 142
        Very basic but free
      • 126
        Git integration
      • 106
        Intellisense
      • 78
        Faster than Atom
      • 53
        Better ui, easy plugins, and nice git integration
      • 45
        Great Refactoring Tools
      • 44
        Good Plugins
      • 42
        Terminal
      • 38
        Superb markdown support
      • 36
        Open Source
      • 35
        Extensions
      • 26
        Awesome UI
      • 26
        Large & up-to-date extension community
      • 24
        Powerful and fast
      • 22
        Portable
      • 18
        Best code editor
      • 18
        Best editor
      • 17
        Easy to get started with
      • 15
        Lots of extensions
      • 15
        Good for begginers
      • 15
        Crossplatform
      • 15
        Built on Electron
      • 14
        Extensions for everything
      • 14
        Open, cross-platform, fast, monthly updates
      • 14
        All Languages Support
      • 13
        Easy to use and learn
      • 12
        "fast, stable & easy to use"
      • 12
        Extensible
      • 11
        Ui design is great
      • 11
        Totally customizable
      • 11
        Git out of the box
      • 11
        Useful for begginer
      • 11
        Faster edit for slow computer
      • 10
        SSH support
      • 10
        Great community
      • 10
        Fast Startup
      • 9
        Works With Almost EveryThing You Need
      • 9
        Great language support
      • 9
        Powerful Debugger
      • 9
        It has terminal and there are lots of shortcuts in it
      • 8
        Can compile and run .py files
      • 8
        Python extension is fast
      • 7
        Features rich
      • 7
        Great document formater
      • 6
        He is not Michael
      • 6
        Extension Echosystem
      • 6
        She is not Rachel
      • 6
        Awesome multi cursor support
      • 5
        VSCode.pro Course makes it easy to learn
      • 5
        Language server client
      • 5
        SFTP Workspace
      • 5
        Very proffesional
      • 5
        Easy azure
      • 4
        Has better support and more extentions for debugging
      • 4
        Supports lots of operating systems
      • 4
        Excellent as git difftool and mergetool
      • 4
        Virtualenv integration
      • 3
        Better autocompletes than Atom
      • 3
        Has more than enough languages for any developer
      • 3
        'batteries included'
      • 3
        More tools to integrate with vs
      • 3
        Emmet preinstalled
      • 2
        VS Code Server: Browser version of VS Code
      • 2
        CMake support with autocomplete
      • 2
        Microsoft
      • 2
        Customizable
      • 2
        Light
      • 2
        Big extension marketplace
      • 2
        Fast and ruby is built right in
      • 1
        File:///C:/Users/ydemi/Downloads/yuksel_demirkaya_webpa
      CONS OF VISUAL STUDIO CODE
      • 46
        Slow startup
      • 29
        Resource hog at times
      • 20
        Poor refactoring
      • 13
        Poor UI Designer
      • 11
        Weak Ui design tools
      • 10
        Poor autocomplete
      • 8
        Super Slow
      • 8
        Huge cpu usage with few installed extension
      • 8
        Microsoft sends telemetry data
      • 7
        Poor in PHP
      • 6
        It's MicroSoft
      • 3
        Poor in Python
      • 3
        No Built in Browser Preview
      • 3
        No color Intergrator
      • 3
        Very basic for java development and buggy at times
      • 3
        No built in live Preview
      • 3
        Electron
      • 2
        Bad Plugin Architecture
      • 2
        Powered by Electron
      • 1
        Terminal does not identify path vars sometimes
      • 1
        Slow C++ Language Server

      related Visual Studio Code posts

      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
      Simon Reymann
      Senior Fullstack Developer at QUANTUSflow Software GmbH · | 30 upvotes · 11.7M 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
      Docker logo

      Docker

      175.1K
      3.9K
      Enterprise Container Platform for High-Velocity Innovation.
      175.1K
      3.9K
      PROS OF DOCKER
      • 823
        Rapid integration and build up
      • 692
        Isolation
      • 521
        Open source
      • 505
        Testa­bil­i­ty and re­pro­ducibil­i­ty
      • 460
        Lightweight
      • 218
        Standardization
      • 185
        Scalable
      • 106
        Upgrading / down­grad­ing / ap­pli­ca­tion versions
      • 88
        Security
      • 85
        Private paas environments
      • 34
        Portability
      • 26
        Limit resource usage
      • 17
        Game changer
      • 16
        I love the way docker has changed virtualization
      • 14
        Fast
      • 12
        Concurrency
      • 8
        Docker's Compose tools
      • 6
        Easy setup
      • 6
        Fast and Portable
      • 5
        Because its fun
      • 4
        Makes shipping to production very simple
      • 3
        Highly useful
      • 3
        It's dope
      • 2
        Package the environment with the application
      • 2
        Super
      • 2
        Open source and highly configurable
      • 2
        Simplicity, isolation, resource effective
      • 2
        MacOS support FAKE
      • 2
        Its cool
      • 2
        Does a nice job hogging memory
      • 2
        Docker hub for the FTW
      • 2
        HIgh Throughput
      • 2
        Very easy to setup integrate and build
      • 0
        Asdfd
      CONS OF DOCKER
      • 8
        New versions == broken features
      • 6
        Unreliable networking
      • 6
        Documentation not always in sync
      • 4
        Moves quickly
      • 3
        Not Secure

      related Docker posts

      Simon Reymann
      Senior Fullstack Developer at QUANTUSflow Software GmbH · | 30 upvotes · 11.7M 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 · 10M 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