Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Flocker vs Kubernetes: What are the differences?
Introduction:
Flocker and Kubernetes are both container orchestration platforms that help manage and scale containers, but they differ in several key aspects.
Architecture: Flocker is a data management solution that focuses on stateful application management, allowing users to move data alongside containers. In contrast, Kubernetes is a full-fledged container management platform that provides an extensive set of features for orchestration, scaling, and monitoring of containerized applications.
Flexibility: Flocker is designed to offer flexibility in data management and data portability for stateful applications in containerized environments. On the other hand, Kubernetes provides a more extensive range of services and resources, enabling users to deploy, manage, and scale applications across various clusters with ease.
Community Support: Kubernetes has a larger and more active community compared to Flocker, leading to better support, continuous development, and a broader range of integrations and third-party tools. This vibrant community ecosystem is crucial in learning, troubleshooting, and expanding the capabilities of the platform.
Scalability: Kubernetes is known for its robust scalability features, allowing users to manage thousands of containers across multiple nodes efficiently. Flocker, while capable of scaling, is more focused on data management and portability rather than orchestrating large-scale container deployments.
Ecosystem Integration: Kubernetes offers seamless integration with various cloud providers, storage solutions, networking tools, and monitoring systems, making it easier to build complex containerized applications with external services. Flocker, although versatile in data management, may not have the same level of integration options compared to Kubernetes.
Ease of Use: Kubernetes has a steeper learning curve due to its comprehensive feature set and complex architecture, requiring more effort to set up and configure compared to Flocker. Flocker, with its focus on simplicity and data management, may be easier to deploy and operate for users primarily concerned with stateful application requirements.
In Summary, Flocker and Kubernetes differ in architecture, flexibility, community support, scalability, ecosystem integration, and ease of use, offering distinct advantages based on users' specific needs and priorities.
Hello, we have a bunch of local hosts (Linux and Windows) where Docker containers are running with bamboo agents on them. Currently, each container is installed as a system service. Each host is set up manually. I want to improve the system by adding some sort of orchestration software that should install, update and check for consistency in my docker containers. I don't need any clouds, all hosts are local. I'd prefer simple solutions. What orchestration system should I choose?
If you just want the basic orchestration between a set of defined hosts, go with Docker Swarm. If you want more advanced orchestration + flexibility in terms of resource management and load balancing go with Kubernetes. In both cases, you can make it even more complex while making the whole architecture more understandable and replicable by using Terraform.
We develop rapidly with docker-compose orchestrated services, however, for production - we utilise the very best ideas that Kubernetes has to offer: SCALE! We can scale when needed, setting a maximum and minimum level of nodes for each application layer - scaling only when the load balancer needs it. This allowed us to reduce our devops costs by 40% whilst also maintaining an SLA of 99.87%.
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.
Pros of Flocker
- Open-Source4
- Easily manage Docker containers with Data3
- Easy setup2
- Great support from their team2
- Multi-host docker-compose support2
- Only requires docker2
Pros of Kubernetes
- Leading docker container management solution164
- Simple and powerful128
- Open source106
- Backed by google76
- The right abstractions58
- Scale services25
- Replication controller20
- Permission managment11
- Supports autoscaling9
- Cheap8
- Simple8
- Self-healing6
- No cloud platform lock-in5
- Promotes modern/good infrascture practice5
- Open, powerful, stable5
- Reliable5
- Scalable4
- Quick cloud setup4
- Cloud Agnostic3
- Captain of Container Ship3
- A self healing environment with rich metadata3
- Runs on azure3
- Backed by Red Hat3
- Custom and extensibility3
- Sfg2
- Gke2
- Everything of CaaS2
- Golang2
- Easy setup2
- Expandable2
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Flocker
Cons of Kubernetes
- Steep learning curve16
- Poor workflow for development15
- Orchestrates only infrastructure8
- High resource requirements for on-prem clusters4
- Too heavy for simple systems2
- Additional vendor lock-in (Docker)1
- More moving parts to secure1
- Additional Technology Overhead1
Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions
What is Flocker?
What is Kubernetes?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
What companies use Flocker?
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
What tools integrate with Flocker?
What tools integrate with Kubernetes?
Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions
Blog Posts
+1
+2
+9
+11
+11+7
+12
+2