Consul vs Nomad: What are the differences?
Developers describe Consul as "A tool for service discovery, monitoring and configuration". Consul is a tool for service discovery and configuration. Consul is distributed, highly available, and extremely scalable. On the other hand, Nomad is detailed as "A cluster manager and scheduler". 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.
Consul can be classified as a tool in the "Open Source Service Discovery" category, while Nomad is grouped under "Cluster Management".
Consul and Nomad are both open source tools. Consul with 16.2K GitHub stars and 2.82K forks on GitHub appears to be more popular than Nomad with 4.86K GitHub stars and 882 GitHub forks.
According to the StackShare community, Consul has a broader approval, being mentioned in 131 company stacks & 52 developers stacks; compared to Nomad, which is listed in 21 company stacks and 3 developer stacks.
Breaking a monolith into microservices and handling the scaling and health of new services as they come only. This should ideally help to reduce the overhead needed to get a service online. We have all of this being handled by custom URLs and health checks being done at the expense of infrastructure setup time and maintenance (VM sprawl). Initially, I am looking at Consul for the TLS proxy and security options as well as the KV store which may prove useful in cross datacenter environments.