Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
AWS CloudFormation vs Cloud Foundry: What are the differences?
Introduction:
AWS CloudFormation and Cloud Foundry are both popular cloud computing platforms that enable organizations to deploy and manage their applications and infrastructure in the cloud. While they share some similarities, there are key differences between the two platforms in terms of their focus, scope, and underlying technologies.
Scope of Management: AWS CloudFormation is primarily focused on managing the infrastructure resources and configuration required for deploying and running applications in the cloud. It provides a way to create and manage a collection of related AWS resources, such as EC2 instances, databases, load balancers, and networking components, all as a single unit called a stack. On the other hand, Cloud Foundry is an open-source platform-as-a-service (PaaS) framework that offers a higher level of abstraction, enabling developers to focus more on the application logic rather than the underlying infrastructure. It provides a runtime environment that handles the deployment, scaling, and management of applications, abstracting away the complexities of infrastructure management.
Multi-Cloud Support: AWS CloudFormation is specific to the Amazon Web Services (AWS) ecosystem and is tightly integrated with other AWS services and features. It enables users to orchestrate the creation and management of AWS resources using declarative templates written in YAML or JSON. Cloud Foundry, on the other hand, is cloud-agnostic and supports multiple cloud providers, including AWS, Google Cloud Platform, and Microsoft Azure, among others. It provides a consistent platform experience across different cloud environments, allowing applications to be deployed and managed seamlessly across various clouds without being locked into a specific cloud provider.
Deployment Approach: AWS CloudFormation follows an infrastructure-as-code (IaC) approach, where the desired configuration of the infrastructure is specified using a template, which is then used to manage the creation, modification, and deletion of resources in a predictable and automated manner. Cloud Foundry, on the other hand, takes a different approach by abstracting away the infrastructure details and focusing on providing a platform for deploying and running applications. It follows a more developer-centric approach, where applications are packaged as self-contained artifacts and deployed using the
cf push
command, which automatically handles the routing, scaling, and lifecycle management of the applications.Community and Ecosystem: AWS CloudFormation benefits from being part of the extensive AWS ecosystem, which offers a wide range of services, tools, and integrations that can be used in conjunction with CloudFormation to build and manage cloud applications. It has a large and active community that provides support, documentation, and a repository of pre-defined templates for different use cases. Cloud Foundry, being an open-source project, also has a vibrant community and ecosystem that contributes to its development and provides a wealth of resources, including buildpacks, service brokers, and marketplace offerings, extending the capabilities of the platform.
Granularity of Control: AWS CloudFormation provides fine-grained control over the resources and configuration settings, allowing users to specify the exact details of how the resources should be provisioned and configured. It supports conditional logic, parameterization, and resource dependencies, enabling users to define complex deployment scenarios. Cloud Foundry, on the other hand, abstracts away the lower-level infrastructure details and provides a higher level of abstraction, which may limit the control and flexibility for users who require more granular control over the deployment and configuration of their applications.
Integration with Existing Workflows: AWS CloudFormation integrates well with other AWS services and can be seamlessly integrated into existing CI/CD pipelines and automation workflows. It supports integration with AWS CodePipeline, AWS CodeCommit, and other DevOps tools, enabling users to automate the entire application lifecycle from development to production. Cloud Foundry also integrates with various CI/CD tools and provides a robust set of APIs and CLI commands for automating tasks, making it easy to incorporate the platform into existing workflows.
In summary, AWS CloudFormation is a service focused on managing the infrastructure resources and configuration in the AWS ecosystem, adopting an infrastructure-as-code approach, while Cloud Foundry is a cloud-agnostic open-source platform-as-a-service framework that simplifies application deployment and management, abstracting away the infrastructure details. Cloud Foundry offers multi-cloud support, a higher level of abstraction, and a vibrant community, while AWS CloudFormation provides fine-grained control, deep integration with AWS services, and native support for AWS resources.
Ok, so first - AWS Copilot is CloudFormation under the hood, but the way it works results in you not thinking about CFN anymore. AWS found the right balance with Copilot - it's insanely simple to setup production-ready multi-account environment with many services inside, with CI/CD out of the box etc etc. It's pretty new, but even now it was enough to launch Transcripto, which uses may be a dozen of different AWS services, all bound together by Copilot.
Because Pulumi uses real programming languages, you can actually write abstractions for your infrastructure code, which is incredibly empowering. You still 'describe' your desired state, but by having a programming language at your fingers, you can factor out patterns, and package it up for easier consumption.
We use Terraform to manage AWS cloud environment for the project. It is pretty complex, largely static, security-focused, and constantly evolving.
Terraform provides descriptive (declarative) way of defining the target configuration, where it can work out the dependencies between configuration elements and apply differences without re-provisioning the entire cloud stack.
AdvantagesTerraform is vendor-neutral in a way that it is using a common configuration language (HCL) with plugins (providers) for multiple cloud and service providers.
Terraform keeps track of the previous state of the deployment and applies incremental changes, resulting in faster deployment times.
Terraform allows us to share reusable modules between projects. We have built an impressive library of modules internally, which makes it very easy to assemble a new project from pre-fabricated building blocks.
DisadvantagesSoftware is imperfect, and Terraform is no exception. Occasionally we hit annoying bugs that we have to work around. The interaction with any underlying APIs is encapsulated inside 3rd party Terraform providers, and any bug fixes or new features require a provider release. Some providers have very poor coverage of the underlying APIs.
Terraform is not great for managing highly dynamic parts of cloud environments. That part is better delegated to other tools or scripts.
Terraform state may go out of sync with the target environment or with the source configuration, which often results in painful reconciliation.
I personally am not a huge fan of vendor lock in for multiple reasons:
- I've seen cost saving moves to the cloud end up costing a fortune and trapping companies due to over utilization of cloud specific features.
- I've seen S3 failures nearly take down half the internet.
- I've seen companies get stuck in the cloud because they aren't built cloud agnostic.
I choose to use terraform for my cloud provisioning for these reasons:
- It's cloud agnostic so I can use it no matter where I am.
- It isn't difficult to use and uses a relatively easy to read language.
- It tests infrastructure before running it, and enables me to see and keep changes up to date.
- It runs from the same CLI I do most of my CM work from.
Pros of AWS CloudFormation
- Automates infrastructure deployments43
- Declarative infrastructure and deployment21
- No more clicking around13
- Any Operative System you want3
- Atomic3
- Infrastructure as code3
- CDK makes it truly infrastructure-as-code1
- Automates Infrastructure Deployment1
- K8s0
Pros of Cloud Foundry
- Perfectly aligned with springboot2
- Free distributed tracing (zipkin)1
- Application health management1
- Free service discovery (Eureka)1
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of AWS CloudFormation
- Brittle4
- No RBAC and policies in templates2