Argo vs Helm: What are the differences?

Key Differences between Argo and Helm

1. Installation Process: Argo and Helm have different installation processes. Argo is installed as a Kubernetes controller, which means it requires persistent storage and runs as a long-running process within the Kubernetes cluster. On the other hand, Helm is installed as a command-line tool that interacts with the Kubernetes API server to deploy and manage applications.

2. Application Packaging and Deployment: Argo and Helm differ in their approach to application packaging and deployment. Argo uses a template-based approach where application manifests are defined as Kubernetes YAML files. It provides more flexibility in defining complex deployment workflows and allows versioning of application manifests. Helm, on the other hand, uses charts to package and deploy applications. Charts are collections of files that describe a set of Kubernetes resources. Helm provides a simpler way to package and deploy applications but may not be as flexible as Argo for complex deployment scenarios.

3. Workflow Orchestration: Argo and Helm have different capabilities when it comes to workflow orchestration. Argo is specifically designed for workflow orchestration and provides features like DAG (Directed Acyclic Graph) execution, parameter passing between steps, and synchronization primitives. Helm, on the other hand, focuses more on application deployment and does not provide native workflow orchestration capabilities. However, Helm can be integrated with other tools or frameworks to achieve workflow orchestration.

4. Application Lifecycle Management: Argo and Helm have different approaches to application lifecycle management. Argo provides advanced features like automatic rollbacks, canary deployments, and rollout history tracking. It allows for more granular control over application updates and rollbacks. Helm, on the other hand, provides basic rollback features but does not have the same level of granularity as Argo for managing application updates and rollbacks.

5. Community Support and Adoption: Argo and Helm have different levels of community support and adoption. Argo is relatively newer compared to Helm and has a smaller community. However, it is gaining popularity for its workflow orchestration capabilities and is actively developed and maintained. Helm, on the other hand, has a larger and more mature community with a wide range of charts available for various applications. It is widely adopted and has been around for a longer time.

6. Tool Ecosystem: Argo and Helm have different tool ecosystems. Argo provides a set of tools that complement its workflow orchestration capabilities, such as Argo CD for continuous deployment and Argo Events for event-driven automation. Helm, on the other hand, is integrated with Kubernetes core tooling and has a vast ecosystem of Helm charts contributed by the community. It can be easily integrated with other Kubernetes tools and frameworks.

In summary, Argo and Helm have different installation processes, application packaging and deployment approaches, workflow orchestration capabilities, application lifecycle management features, levels of community support and adoption, and tool ecosystems. Choosing between Argo and Helm depends on the specific requirements and preferences of the application deployment and management process.