Alternatives to kops logo

Alternatives to kops

Amazon EKS, Rancher, Terraform, Helm, and minikube are the most popular alternatives and competitors to kops.
89
71
+ 1
0

What is kops and what are its top alternatives?

It helps you create, destroy, upgrade and maintain production-grade, highly available, Kubernetes clusters from the command line. AWS (Amazon Web Services) is currently officially supported, with GCE in beta support , and VMware vSphere in alpha, and other platforms planned.
kops is a tool in the Cluster Management category of a tech stack.
kops is an open source tool with 14.4K GitHub stars and 4.4K GitHub forks. Here’s a link to kops's open source repository on GitHub

Top Alternatives to kops

  • Amazon EKS
    Amazon EKS

    Amazon Elastic Container Service for Kubernetes (Amazon EKS) is a managed service that makes it easy for you to run Kubernetes on AWS without needing to install and operate your own Kubernetes clusters. ...

  • Rancher
    Rancher

    Rancher is an open source container management platform that includes full distributions of Kubernetes, Apache Mesos and Docker Swarm, and makes it simple to operate container clusters on any cloud or infrastructure platform. ...

  • Terraform
    Terraform

    With Terraform, you describe your complete infrastructure as code, even as it spans multiple service providers. Your servers may come from AWS, your DNS may come from CloudFlare, and your database may come from Heroku. Terraform will build all these resources across all these providers in parallel. ...

  • Helm
    Helm

    Helm is the best way to find, share, and use software built for Kubernetes.

  • minikube
    minikube

    It implements a local Kubernetes cluster on macOS, Linux, and Windows. Its goal is to be the tool for local Kubernetes application development and to support all Kubernetes features that fit. ...

  • Apache Mesos
    Apache Mesos

    Apache Mesos is a cluster manager that simplifies the complexity of running applications on a shared pool of servers. ...

  • Nomad
    Nomad

    Nomad is a cluster manager, designed for both long lived services and short lived batch processing workloads. Developers use a declarative job specification to submit work, and Nomad ensures constraints are satisfied and resource utilization is optimized by efficient task packing. Nomad supports all major operating systems and virtualized, containerized, or standalone applications. ...

  • YARN Hadoop
    YARN Hadoop

    Its fundamental idea is to split up the functionalities of resource management and job scheduling/monitoring into separate daemons. The idea is to have a global ResourceManager (RM) and per-application ApplicationMaster (AM). ...

kops alternatives & related posts

Amazon EKS logo

Amazon EKS

783
411
3
Highly available and scalable Kubernetes service
783
411
+ 1
3
PROS OF AMAZON EKS
  • 1
    Better control
  • 1
    Possibility to log in into the pods
  • 1
    Broad package manager using helm
CONS OF AMAZON EKS
    Be the first to leave a con

    related Amazon EKS posts

    We are looking for a centralised monitoring solution for our application deployed on Amazon EKS. We would like to monitor using metrics from Kubernetes, AWS services (NeptuneDB, AWS Elastic Load Balancing (ELB), Amazon EBS, Amazon S3, etc) and application microservice's custom metrics.

    We are expected to use around 80 microservices (not replicas). I think a total of 200-250 microservices will be there in the system with 10-12 slave nodes.

    We tried Prometheus but it looks like maintenance is a big issue. We need to manage scaling, maintaining the storage, and dealing with multiple exporters and Grafana. I felt this itself needs few dedicated resources (at least 2-3 people) to manage. Not sure if I am thinking in the correct direction. Please confirm.

    You mentioned Datadog and Sysdig charges per host. Does it charge per slave node?

    See more
    Sebastian Gębski

    Heroku was a decent choice to start a business, but at some point our platform was too big, too complex & too heterogenic, so Heroku started to be a constraint, not a benefit. First, we've started containerizing our apps with Docker to eliminate "works in my machine" syndrome & uniformize the environment setup. The first orchestration was composed with Docker Compose , but at some point it made sense to move it to Kubernetes. Fortunately, we've made a very good technical decision when starting our work with containers - all the container configuration & provisions HAD (since the beginning) to be done in code (Infrastructure as Code) - we've used Terraform & Ansible for that (correspondingly). This general trend of containerisation was accompanied by another, parallel & equally big project: migrating environments from Heroku to AWS: using Amazon EC2 , Amazon EKS, Amazon S3 & Amazon RDS.

    See more
    Rancher logo

    Rancher

    869
    1.4K
    644
    Open Source Platform for Running a Private Container Service
    869
    1.4K
    + 1
    644
    PROS OF RANCHER
    • 103
      Easy to use
    • 79
      Open source and totally free
    • 63
      Multi-host docker-compose support
    • 58
      Load balancing and health check included
    • 58
      Simple
    • 44
      Rolling upgrades, green/blue upgrades feature
    • 42
      Dns and service discovery out-of-the-box
    • 37
      Only requires docker
    • 34
      Multitenant and permission management
    • 29
      Easy to use and feature rich
    • 11
      Cross cloud compatible
    • 11
      Does everything needed for a docker infrastructure
    • 8
      Simple and powerful
    • 8
      Next-gen platform
    • 7
      Very Docker-friendly
    • 6
      Support Kubernetes and Swarm
    • 6
      Application catalogs with stack templates (wizards)
    • 6
      Supports Apache Mesos, Docker Swarm, and Kubernetes
    • 6
      Rolling and blue/green upgrades deployments
    • 6
      High Availability service: keeps your app up 24/7
    • 5
      Easy to use service catalog
    • 4
      Very intuitive UI
    • 4
      IaaS-vendor independent, supports hybrid/multi-cloud
    • 4
      Awesome support
    • 3
      Scalable
    • 2
      Requires less infrastructure requirements
    CONS OF RANCHER
    • 10
      Hosting Rancher can be complicated

    related Rancher posts

    Terraform logo

    Terraform

    20.8K
    11.2K
    337
    Describe your complete infrastructure as code and build resources across providers
    20.8K
    11.2K
    + 1
    337
    PROS OF TERRAFORM
    • 117
      Infrastructure as code
    • 73
      Declarative syntax
    • 44
      Planning
    • 28
      Simple
    • 24
      Parallelism
    • 8
      Well-documented
    • 7
      Cloud agnostic
    • 6
      It's like coding your infrastructure in simple English
    • 5
      Platform agnostic
    • 5
      Immutable infrastructure
    • 4
      Portability
    • 4
      Automation
    • 4
      Automates infrastructure deployments
    • 4
      Extendable
    • 2
      Scales to hundreds of hosts
    • 2
      Lightweight
    CONS OF TERRAFORM
    • 1
      Doesn't have full support to GKE

    related Terraform posts

    Emanuel Evans
    Senior Architect at Rainforest QA · | 19 upvotes · 1.1M views

    We recently moved our main applications from Heroku to Kubernetes . The 3 main driving factors behind the switch were scalability (database size limits), security (the inability to set up PostgreSQL instances in private networks), and costs (GCP is cheaper for raw computing resources).

    We prefer using managed services, so we are using Google Kubernetes Engine with Google Cloud SQL for PostgreSQL for our PostgreSQL databases and Google Cloud Memorystore for Redis . For our CI/CD pipeline, we are using CircleCI and Google Cloud Build to deploy applications managed with Helm . The new infrastructure is managed with Terraform .

    Read the blog post to go more in depth.

    See more
    Praveen Mooli
    Engineering Manager at Taylor and Francis · | 17 upvotes · 2.5M 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
    Helm logo

    Helm

    1.2K
    773
    18
    The Kubernetes Package Manager
    1.2K
    773
    + 1
    18
    PROS OF HELM
    • 8
      Infrastructure as code
    • 6
      Open source
    • 2
      Easy setup
    • 1
      Support
    • 1
      Testa­bil­i­ty and re­pro­ducibil­i­ty
    CONS OF HELM
      Be the first to leave a con

      related Helm posts

      Emanuel Evans
      Senior Architect at Rainforest QA · | 19 upvotes · 1.1M views

      We recently moved our main applications from Heroku to Kubernetes . The 3 main driving factors behind the switch were scalability (database size limits), security (the inability to set up PostgreSQL instances in private networks), and costs (GCP is cheaper for raw computing resources).

      We prefer using managed services, so we are using Google Kubernetes Engine with Google Cloud SQL for PostgreSQL for our PostgreSQL databases and Google Cloud Memorystore for Redis . For our CI/CD pipeline, we are using CircleCI and Google Cloud Build to deploy applications managed with Helm . The new infrastructure is managed with Terraform .

      Read the blog post to go more in depth.

      See more
      Ido Shamun
      at The Elegant Monkeys · | 7 upvotes · 346.4K views

      Kubernetes powers our #backend services as it is very easy in terms of #devops (the managed version). We deploy everything using @helm charts as it provides us to manage deployments the same way we manage our code on GitHub . On every commit a CircleCI job is triggered to run the tests, build Docker images and deploy them to the registry. Finally on every master commit CircleCI also deploys the relevant service using Helm chart to our Kubernetes cluster

      See more
      minikube logo

      minikube

      94
      220
      3
      Local Kubernetes engine
      94
      220
      + 1
      3
      PROS OF MINIKUBE
      • 1
        Let's me test k8s config locally
      • 1
        Can use same yaml config I'll use for prod deployment
      • 1
        Easy setup
      CONS OF MINIKUBE
        Be the first to leave a con

        related minikube posts

        Apache Mesos logo

        Apache Mesos

        299
        407
        31
        Develop and run resource-efficient distributed systems
        299
        407
        + 1
        31
        PROS OF APACHE MESOS
        • 21
          Easy scaling
        • 6
          Web UI
        • 2
          Fault-Tolerant
        • 1
          Elastic Distributed System
        • 1
          High-Available
        CONS OF APACHE MESOS
        • 1
          Not for long term
        • 1
          Depends on Zookeeper

        related Apache Mesos posts

        Docker containers on Mesos run their microservices with consistent configurations at scale, along with Aurora for long-running services and cron jobs.

        See more
        Nomad logo

        Nomad

        238
        318
        32
        A cluster manager and scheduler
        238
        318
        + 1
        32
        PROS OF NOMAD
        • 7
          Built in Consul integration
        • 6
          Easy setup
        • 4
          Bult-in Vault integration
        • 3
          Built-in federation support
        • 2
          Self-healing
        • 2
          Autoscaling support
        • 1
          Bult-in Vault inegration
        • 1
          Stable
        • 1
          Simple
        • 1
          Nice ACL
        • 1
          Managable by terraform
        • 1
          Open source
        • 1
          Multiple workload support
        • 1
          Flexible
        CONS OF NOMAD
        • 3
          Easy to start with
        • 1
          HCL language for configuration, an unpopular DSL
        • 1
          Small comunity

        related Nomad posts

        Robert Zuber

        Our backend consists of two major pools of machines. One pool hosts the systems that run our site, manage jobs, and send notifications. These services are deployed within Docker containers orchestrated in Kubernetes. Due to Kubernetes’ ecosystem and toolchain, it was an obvious choice for our fairly statically-defined processes: the rate of change of job types or how many we may need in our internal stack is relatively low.

        The other pool of machines is for running our users’ jobs. Because we cannot dynamically predict demand, what types of jobs our users need to have run, nor the resources required for each of those jobs, we found that Nomad excelled over Kubernetes in this area.

        We’re also using Helm to make it easier to deploy new services into Kubernetes. We create a chart (i.e. package) for each service. This lets us easily roll back new software and gives us an audit trail of what was installed or upgraded.

        See more
        YARN Hadoop logo

        YARN Hadoop

        108
        76
        1
        Resource management and job scheduling technology
        108
        76
        + 1
        1
        PROS OF YARN HADOOP
        • 1
          Batch processing with commodity machine
        CONS OF YARN HADOOP
          Be the first to leave a con

          related YARN Hadoop posts