Alternatives to AWS Elastic Beanstalk logo

Alternatives to AWS Elastic Beanstalk

Google App Engine, AWS CodeDeploy, Docker, AWS CloudFormation, and Azure App Service are the most popular alternatives and competitors to AWS Elastic Beanstalk.
1.7K
1.2K
+ 1
234

What is AWS Elastic Beanstalk and what are its top alternatives?

Once you upload your application, Elastic Beanstalk automatically handles the deployment details of capacity provisioning, load balancing, auto-scaling, and application health monitoring.
AWS Elastic Beanstalk is a tool in the Platform as a Service category of a tech stack.

AWS Elastic Beanstalk alternatives & related posts

related Google App Engine posts

Nick Rockwell
Nick Rockwell
CTO at NY Times · | 11 upvotes · 116.2K views
atThe New York TimesThe New York Times
Amazon EC2
Amazon EC2
Google App Engine
Google App Engine
Google Kubernetes Engine
Google Kubernetes Engine
Kubernetes
Kubernetes
#AWS
#GCP
#AWStoGCPmigration
#Cloudmigration
#Migration

So, the shift from Amazon EC2 to Google App Engine and generally #AWS to #GCP was a long decision and in the end, it's one that we've taken with eyes open and that we reserve the right to modify at any time. And to be clear, we continue to do a lot of stuff with AWS. But, by default, the content of the decision was, for our consumer-facing products, we're going to use GCP first. And if there's some reason why we don't think that's going to work out great, then we'll happily use AWS. In practice, that hasn't really happened. We've been able to meet almost 100% of our needs in GCP.

So it's basically mostly Google Kubernetes Engine , we're mostly running stuff on Kubernetes right now.

#AWStoGCPmigration #cloudmigration #migration

See more
AWS CodeDeploy logo

AWS CodeDeploy

219
202
38
219
202
+ 1
38
Coordinate application deployments to Amazon EC2 instances
AWS CodeDeploy logo
AWS CodeDeploy
VS
AWS Elastic Beanstalk logo
AWS Elastic Beanstalk

related AWS CodeDeploy posts

Chris McFadden
Chris McFadden
VP, Engineering at SparkPost · | 9 upvotes · 72.5K views
atSparkPostSparkPost
AWS CodeBuild
AWS CodeBuild
AWS CodeDeploy
AWS CodeDeploy
Amazon EC2 Container Service
Amazon EC2 Container Service
AWS Lambda
AWS Lambda
GitHub
GitHub

The recent move of our CI/CD tooling to AWS CodeBuild / AWS CodeDeploy (with GitHub ) as well as moving to Amazon EC2 Container Service / AWS Lambda for our deployment architecture for most of our services has helped us significantly reduce our deployment times while improving both feature velocity and overall reliability. In one extreme case, we got one service down from 90 minutes to a very reasonable 15 minutes. Container-based build and deployments have made so many things simpler and easier and the integration between the tools has been helpful. There is still some work to do on our service mesh & API proxy approach to further simplify our environment.

See more
Sathish Raju
Sathish Raju
Founder/CTO at Kloudio · | 5 upvotes · 30.4K views
atKloudioKloudio
Node.js
Node.js
Angular 2
Angular 2
React
React
TypeScript
TypeScript
Docker
Docker
AWS CodePipeline
AWS CodePipeline
AWS CodeDeploy
AWS CodeDeploy
AWS Lambda
AWS Lambda
#Kloudio.
#AWS

At Kloud.io we use Node.js for our backend Microservices and Angular 2 for the frontend. We also use React for a couple of our internal applications. Writing services in Node.js in TypeScript improved developer productivity and we could capture bugs way before they can occur in the production. The use of Angular 2 in our production environment reduced the time to release any new features. At the same time, we are also exploring React by using it in our internal tools. So far we enjoyed what React has to offer. We are an enterprise SAAS product and also offer an on-premise or hybrid cloud version of #kloudio. We heavily use Docker for shipping our on-premise version. We also use Docker internally for automated testing. Using Docker reduced the install time errors in customer environments. Our cloud version is deployed in #AWS. We use AWS CodePipeline and AWS CodeDeploy for our CI/CD. We also use AWS Lambda for automation jobs.

See more

related Docker posts

Tymoteusz Paul
Tymoteusz Paul
Devops guy at X20X Development LTD · | 21 upvotes · 1.7M views
Vagrant
Vagrant
VirtualBox
VirtualBox
Ansible
Ansible
Elasticsearch
Elasticsearch
Kibana
Kibana
Logstash
Logstash
TeamCity
TeamCity
Jenkins
Jenkins
Slack
Slack
Apache Maven
Apache Maven
Vault
Vault
Git
Git
Docker
Docker
CircleCI
CircleCI
LXC
LXC
Amazon EC2
Amazon EC2

Often enough I have to explain my way of going about setting up a CI/CD pipeline with multiple deployment platforms. Since I am a bit tired of yapping the same every single time, I've decided to write it up and share with the world this way, and send people to read it instead ;). I will explain it on "live-example" of how the Rome got built, basing that current methodology exists only of readme.md and wishes of good luck (as it usually is ;)).

It always starts with an app, whatever it may be and reading the readmes available while Vagrant and VirtualBox is installing and updating. Following that is the first hurdle to go over - convert all the instruction/scripts into Ansible playbook(s), and only stopping when doing a clear vagrant up or vagrant reload we will have a fully working environment. As our Vagrant environment is now functional, it's time to break it! This is the moment to look for how things can be done better (too rigid/too lose versioning? Sloppy environment setup?) and replace them with the right way to do stuff, one that won't bite us in the backside. This is the point, and the best opportunity, to upcycle the existing way of doing dev environment to produce a proper, production-grade product.

I should probably digress here for a moment and explain why. I firmly believe that the way you deploy production is the same way you should deploy develop, shy of few debugging-friendly setting. This way you avoid the discrepancy between how production work vs how development works, which almost always causes major pains in the back of the neck, and with use of proper tools should mean no more work for the developers. That's why we start with Vagrant as developer boxes should be as easy as vagrant up, but the meat of our product lies in Ansible which will do meat of the work and can be applied to almost anything: AWS, bare metal, docker, LXC, in open net, behind vpn - you name it.

We must also give proper consideration to monitoring and logging hoovering at this point. My generic answer here is to grab Elasticsearch, Kibana, and Logstash. While for different use cases there may be better solutions, this one is well battle-tested, performs reasonably and is very easy to scale both vertically (within some limits) and horizontally. Logstash rules are easy to write and are well supported in maintenance through Ansible, which as I've mentioned earlier, are at the very core of things, and creating triggers/reports and alerts based on Elastic and Kibana is generally a breeze, including some quite complex aggregations.

If we are happy with the state of the Ansible it's time to move on and put all those roles and playbooks to work. Namely, we need something to manage our CI/CD pipelines. For me, the choice is obvious: TeamCity. It's modern, robust and unlike most of the light-weight alternatives, it's transparent. What I mean by that is that it doesn't tell you how to do things, doesn't limit your ways to deploy, or test, or package for that matter. Instead, it provides a developer-friendly and rich playground for your pipelines. You can do most the same with Jenkins, but it has a quite dated look and feel to it, while also missing some key functionality that must be brought in via plugins (like quality REST API which comes built-in with TeamCity). It also comes with all the common-handy plugins like Slack or Apache Maven integration.

The exact flow between CI and CD varies too greatly from one application to another to describe, so I will outline a few rules that guide me in it: 1. Make build steps as small as possible. This way when something breaks, we know exactly where, without needing to dig and root around. 2. All security credentials besides development environment must be sources from individual Vault instances. Keys to those containers should exist only on the CI/CD box and accessible by a few people (the less the better). This is pretty self-explanatory, as anything besides dev may contain sensitive data and, at times, be public-facing. Because of that appropriate security must be present. TeamCity shines in this department with excellent secrets-management. 3. Every part of the build chain shall consume and produce artifacts. If it creates nothing, it likely shouldn't be its own build. This way if any issue shows up with any environment or version, all developer has to do it is grab appropriate artifacts to reproduce the issue locally. 4. Deployment builds should be directly tied to specific Git branches/tags. This enables much easier tracking of what caused an issue, including automated identifying and tagging the author (nothing like automated regression testing!).

Speaking of deployments, I generally try to keep it simple but also with a close eye on the wallet. Because of that, I am more than happy with AWS or another cloud provider, but also constantly peeking at the loads and do we get the value of what we are paying for. Often enough the pattern of use is not constantly erratic, but rather has a firm baseline which could be migrated away from the cloud and into bare metal boxes. That is another part where this approach strongly triumphs over the common Docker and CircleCI setup, where you are very much tied in to use cloud providers and getting out is expensive. Here to embrace bare-metal hosting all you need is a help of some container-based self-hosting software, my personal preference is with Proxmox and LXC. Following that all you must write are ansible scripts to manage hardware of Proxmox, similar way as you do for Amazon EC2 (ansible supports both greatly) and you are good to go. One does not exclude another, quite the opposite, as they can live in great synergy and cut your costs dramatically (the heavier your base load, the bigger the savings) while providing production-grade resiliency.

See more
Tim Nolet
Tim Nolet
Founder, Engineer & Dishwasher at Checkly · | 20 upvotes · 1.1M views
atChecklyHQChecklyHQ
Heroku
Heroku
Docker
Docker
GitHub
GitHub
Node.js
Node.js
hapi
hapi
Vue.js
Vue.js
AWS Lambda
AWS Lambda
Amazon S3
Amazon S3
PostgreSQL
PostgreSQL
Knex.js
Knex.js
vuex
vuex

Heroku Docker GitHub Node.js hapi Vue.js AWS Lambda Amazon S3 PostgreSQL Knex.js Checkly is a fairly young company and we're still working hard to find the correct mix of product features, price and audience.

We are focussed on tech B2B, but I always wanted to serve solo developers too. So I decided to make a $7 plan.

Why $7? Simply put, it seems to be a sweet spot for tech companies: Heroku, Docker, Github, Appoptics (Librato) all offer $7 plans. They must have done a ton of research into this, so why not piggy back that and try it out.

Enough biz talk, onto tech. The challenges were:

  • Slice of a portion of the functionality so a $7 plan is still profitable. We call this the "plan limits"
  • Update API and back end services to handle and enforce plan limits.
  • Update the UI to kindly state plan limits are in effect on some part of the UI.
  • Update the pricing page to reflect all changes.
  • Keep the actual processing backend, storage and API's as untouched as possible.

In essence, we went from strictly volume based pricing to value based pricing. Here come the technical steps & decisions we made to get there.

  1. We updated our PostgreSQL schema so plans now have an array of "features". These are string constants that represent feature toggles.
  2. The Vue.js frontend reads these from the vuex store on login.
  3. Based on these values, the UI has simple v-if statements to either just show the feature or show a friendly "please upgrade" button.
  4. The hapi API has a hook on each relevant API endpoint that checks whether a user's plan has the feature enabled, or not.

Side note: We offer 10 SMS messages per month on the developer plan. However, we were not actually counting how many people were sending. We had to update our alerting daemon (that runs on Heroku and triggers SMS messages via AWS SNS) to actually bump a counter.

What we build is basically feature-toggling based on plan features. It is very extensible for future additions. Our scheduling and storage backend that actually runs users' monitoring requests (AWS Lambda) and stores the results (S3 and Postgres) has no knowledge of all of this and remained unchanged.

Hope this helps anyone building out their SaaS and is in a similar situation.

See more

related AWS CloudFormation posts

Joseph Kunzler
Joseph Kunzler
DevOps Engineer at Tillable · | 9 upvotes · 82K views
atTillableTillable
Amazon S3
Amazon S3
Amazon EC2
Amazon EC2
AWS Elastic Load Balancing (ELB)
AWS Elastic Load Balancing (ELB)
AWS CloudFormation
AWS CloudFormation
Terraform
Terraform

We use Terraform because we needed a way to automate the process of building and deploying feature branches. We wanted to hide the complexity such that when a dev creates a PR, it triggers a build and deployment without the dev having to worry about any of the 'plumbing' going on behind the scenes. Terraform allows us to automate the process of provisioning DNS records, Amazon S3 buckets, Amazon EC2 instances and AWS Elastic Load Balancing (ELB)'s. It also makes it easy to tear it all down when finished. We also like that it supports multiple clouds, which is why we chose to use it over AWS CloudFormation.

See more
Terraform
Terraform
Google Cloud Deployment Manager
Google Cloud Deployment Manager
AWS CloudFormation
AWS CloudFormation

I use Terraform because it hits the level of abstraction pocket of being high-level and flexible, and is agnostic to cloud platforms. Creating complex infrastructure components for a solution with a UI console is tedious to repeat. Using low-level APIs are usually specific to cloud platforms, and you still have to build your own tooling for deploying, state management, and destroying infrastructure.

However, Terraform is usually slower to implement new services compared to cloud-specific APIs. It's worth the trade-off though, especially if you're multi-cloud. I heard someone say, "We want to preference a cloud, not lock in to one." Terraform builds on that claim.

Terraform Google Cloud Deployment Manager AWS CloudFormation

See more
Azure App Service logo

Azure App Service

101
79
2
101
79
+ 1
2
Build, deploy, and scale web apps on a fully managed platform
Azure App Service logo
Azure App Service
VS
AWS Elastic Beanstalk logo
AWS Elastic Beanstalk
Heroku logo

Heroku

10.5K
8.1K
3.2K
10.5K
8.1K
+ 1
3.2K
Build, deliver, monitor and scale web apps and APIs with a trail blazing developer experience.
Heroku logo
Heroku
VS
AWS Elastic Beanstalk logo
AWS Elastic Beanstalk

related Heroku posts

Russel Werner
Russel Werner
Lead Engineer at StackShare · | 27 upvotes · 684K views
atStackShareStackShare
React
React
Glamorous
Glamorous
Apollo
Apollo
Node.js
Node.js
Rails
Rails
Heroku
Heroku
GitHub
GitHub
Amazon S3
Amazon S3
Amazon CloudFront
Amazon CloudFront
Webpack
Webpack
CircleCI
CircleCI
Redis
Redis
#StackDecisionsLaunch
#SSR
#Microservices
#FrontEndRepoSplit

StackShare Feed is built entirely with React, Glamorous, and Apollo. One of our objectives with the public launch of the Feed was to enable a Server-side rendered (SSR) experience for our organic search traffic. When you visit the StackShare Feed, and you aren't logged in, you are delivered the Trending feed experience. We use an in-house Node.js rendering microservice to generate this HTML. This microservice needs to run and serve requests independent of our Rails web app. Up until recently, we had a mono-repo with our Rails and React code living happily together and all served from the same web process. In order to deploy our SSR app into a Heroku environment, we needed to split out our front-end application into a separate repo in GitHub. The driving factor in this decision was mostly due to limitations imposed by Heroku specifically with how processes can't communicate with each other. A new SSR app was created in Heroku and linked directly to the frontend repo so it stays in-sync with changes.

Related to this, we need a way to "deploy" our frontend changes to various server environments without building & releasing the entire Ruby application. We built a hybrid Amazon S3 Amazon CloudFront solution to host our Webpack bundles. A new CircleCI script builds the bundles and uploads them to S3. The final step in our rollout is to update some keys in Redis so our Rails app knows which bundles to serve. The result of these efforts were significant. Our frontend team now moves independently of our backend team, our build & release process takes only a few minutes, we are now using an edge CDN to serve JS assets, and we have pre-rendered React pages!

#StackDecisionsLaunch #SSR #Microservices #FrontEndRepoSplit

See more
Tim Nolet
Tim Nolet
Founder, Engineer & Dishwasher at Checkly · | 20 upvotes · 1.1M views
atChecklyHQChecklyHQ
Heroku
Heroku
Docker
Docker
GitHub
GitHub
Node.js
Node.js
hapi
hapi
Vue.js
Vue.js
AWS Lambda
AWS Lambda
Amazon S3
Amazon S3
PostgreSQL
PostgreSQL
Knex.js
Knex.js
vuex
vuex

Heroku Docker GitHub Node.js hapi Vue.js AWS Lambda Amazon S3 PostgreSQL Knex.js Checkly is a fairly young company and we're still working hard to find the correct mix of product features, price and audience.

We are focussed on tech B2B, but I always wanted to serve solo developers too. So I decided to make a $7 plan.

Why $7? Simply put, it seems to be a sweet spot for tech companies: Heroku, Docker, Github, Appoptics (Librato) all offer $7 plans. They must have done a ton of research into this, so why not piggy back that and try it out.

Enough biz talk, onto tech. The challenges were:

  • Slice of a portion of the functionality so a $7 plan is still profitable. We call this the "plan limits"
  • Update API and back end services to handle and enforce plan limits.
  • Update the UI to kindly state plan limits are in effect on some part of the UI.
  • Update the pricing page to reflect all changes.
  • Keep the actual processing backend, storage and API's as untouched as possible.

In essence, we went from strictly volume based pricing to value based pricing. Here come the technical steps & decisions we made to get there.

  1. We updated our PostgreSQL schema so plans now have an array of "features". These are string constants that represent feature toggles.
  2. The Vue.js frontend reads these from the vuex store on login.
  3. Based on these values, the UI has simple v-if statements to either just show the feature or show a friendly "please upgrade" button.
  4. The hapi API has a hook on each relevant API endpoint that checks whether a user's plan has the feature enabled, or not.

Side note: We offer 10 SMS messages per month on the developer plan. However, we were not actually counting how many people were sending. We had to update our alerting daemon (that runs on Heroku and triggers SMS messages via AWS SNS) to actually bump a counter.

What we build is basically feature-toggling based on plan features. It is very extensible for future additions. Our scheduling and storage backend that actually runs users' monitoring requests (AWS Lambda) and stores the results (S3 and Postgres) has no knowledge of all of this and remained unchanged.

Hope this helps anyone building out their SaaS and is in a similar situation.

See more
Apollo logo

Apollo

1.1K
873
10
1.1K
873
+ 1
10
GraphQL server for Express, Connect, Hapi, Koa and more
Apollo logo
Apollo
VS
AWS Elastic Beanstalk logo
AWS Elastic Beanstalk

related Apollo posts

Nick Rockwell
Nick Rockwell
CTO at NY Times · | 30 upvotes · 881.6K views
atThe New York TimesThe New York Times
MySQL
MySQL
PHP
PHP
React
React
Apollo
Apollo
GraphQL
GraphQL
Node.js
Node.js
Kafka
Kafka
Apache HTTP Server
Apache HTTP Server

When I joined NYT there was already broad dissatisfaction with the LAMP (Linux Apache HTTP Server MySQL PHP) Stack and the front end framework, in particular. So, I wasn't passing judgment on it. I mean, LAMP's fine, you can do good work in LAMP. It's a little dated at this point, but it's not ... I didn't want to rip it out for its own sake, but everyone else was like, "We don't like this, it's really inflexible." And I remember from being outside the company when that was called MIT FIVE when it had launched. And been observing it from the outside, and I was like, you guys took so long to do that and you did it so carefully, and yet you're not happy with your decisions. Why is that? That was more the impetus. If we're going to do this again, how are we going to do it in a way that we're gonna get a better result?

So we're moving quickly away from LAMP, I would say. So, right now, the new front end is React based and using Apollo. And we've been in a long, protracted, gradual rollout of the core experiences.

React is now talking to GraphQL as a primary API. There's a Node.js back end, to the front end, which is mainly for server-side rendering, as well.

Behind there, the main repository for the GraphQL server is a big table repository, that we call Bodega because it's a convenience store. And that reads off of a Kafka pipeline.

See more
Adam Neary
Adam Neary
Engineer at Airbnb · | 28 upvotes · 662.4K views
atAirbnbAirbnb
GraphQL
GraphQL
GraphQL Playground
GraphQL Playground
Apollo
Apollo
#BackendDrivenUI
#Prisma

At Airbnb we use GraphQL Unions for a "Backend-Driven UI." We have built a system where a very dynamic page is constructed based on a query that will return an array of some set of possible “sections.” These sections are responsive and define the UI completely.

The central file that manages this would be a generated file. Since the list of possible sections is quite large (~50 sections today for Search), it also presumes we have a sane mechanism for lazy-loading components with server rendering, which is a topic for another post. Suffice it to say, we do not need to package all possible sections in a massive bundle to account for everything up front.

Each section component defines its own query fragment, colocated with the section’s component code. This is the general idea of Backend-Driven UI at Airbnb. It’s used in a number of places, including Search, Trip Planner, Host tools, and various landing pages. We use this as our starting point, and then in the demo show how to (1) make and update to an existing section, and (2) add a new section.

While building your product, you want to be able to explore your schema, discovering field names and testing out potential queries on live development data. We achieve that today with GraphQL Playground, the work of our friends at #Prisma. The tools come standard with Apollo Server.

#BackendDrivenUI

See more

related Red Hat OpenShift posts

Conor Myhrvold
Conor Myhrvold
Tech Brand Mgr, Office of CTO at Uber · | 24 upvotes · 2M views
atUber TechnologiesUber Technologies
Jaeger
Jaeger
Python
Python
Java
Java
Node.js
Node.js
Go
Go
C++
C++
Kubernetes
Kubernetes
JavaScript
JavaScript
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
C#
C#
Apache Spark
Apache Spark

How Uber developed the open source, end-to-end distributed tracing Jaeger , now a CNCF project:

Distributed tracing is quickly becoming a must-have component in the tools that organizations use to monitor their complex, microservice-based architectures. At Uber, our open source distributed tracing system Jaeger saw large-scale internal adoption throughout 2016, integrated into hundreds of microservices and now recording thousands of traces every second.

Here is the story of how we got here, from investigating off-the-shelf solutions like Zipkin, to why we switched from pull to push architecture, and how distributed tracing will continue to evolve:

https://eng.uber.com/distributed-tracing/

(GitHub Pages : https://www.jaegertracing.io/, GitHub: https://github.com/jaegertracing/jaeger)

Bindings/Operator: Python Java Node.js Go C++ Kubernetes JavaScript OpenShift C# Apache Spark

See more
Michael Ionita
Michael Ionita
CTO at Walls.io GmbH · | 6 upvotes · 97.6K views
atWalls.ioWalls.io
Kubernetes
Kubernetes
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift

We use Kubernetes because we decided to migrate to a hosted cluster (not AWS) and still be able to scale our clusters up and down depending on load. By wrapping it with OpenShift we are now able to easily adapt to demand but also able to separate concerns into separate Pods depending on use-cases we have.

See more