Alternatives to Kuma logo

Alternatives to Kuma

Panda, Istio, Envoy, Kong, and Git are the most popular alternatives and competitors to Kuma.
16
95
+ 1
0

What is Kuma and what are its top alternatives?

It is a universal open source control-plane for Service Mesh and Microservices that can run and be operated natively across both Kubernetes and VM environments, in order to be easily adopted by every team in the organization.
Kuma is a tool in the Microservices Tools category of a tech stack.
Kuma is an open source tool with 2.3K GitHub stars and 169 GitHub forks. Here’s a link to Kuma's open source repository on GitHub

Top Alternatives to Kuma

  • Panda
    Panda

    Panda is a cloud-based platform that provides video and audio encoding infrastructure. It features lightning fast encoding, and broad support for a huge number of video and audio codecs. You can upload to Panda either from your own web application using our REST API, or by utilizing our easy to use web interface.<br> ...

  • Istio
    Istio

    Istio is an open platform for providing a uniform way to integrate microservices, manage traffic flow across microservices, enforce policies and aggregate telemetry data. Istio's control plane provides an abstraction layer over the underlying cluster management platform, such as Kubernetes, Mesos, etc. ...

  • Envoy
    Envoy

    Originally built at Lyft, Envoy is a high performance C++ distributed proxy designed for single services and applications, as well as a communication bus and “universal data plane” designed for large microservice “service mesh” architectures. ...

  • Kong
    Kong

    Kong is a scalable, open source API Layer (also known as an API Gateway, or API Middleware). Kong controls layer 4 and 7 traffic and is extended through Plugins, which provide extra functionality and services beyond the core platform. ...

  • Git
    Git

    Git is a free and open source distributed version control system designed to handle everything from small to very large projects with speed and efficiency. ...

  • GitHub
    GitHub

    GitHub is the best place to share code with friends, co-workers, classmates, and complete strangers. Over three million people use GitHub to build amazing things together. ...

  • Visual Studio Code
    Visual Studio Code

    Build and debug modern web and cloud applications. Code is free and available on your favorite platform - Linux, Mac OSX, and Windows. ...

  • Docker
    Docker

    The Docker Platform is the industry-leading container platform for continuous, high-velocity innovation, enabling organizations to seamlessly build and share any application — from legacy to what comes next — and securely run them anywhere ...

Kuma alternatives & related posts

Panda logo

Panda

11
0
Dedicated video encoding in the cloud
11
0
PROS OF PANDA
    Be the first to leave a pro
    CONS OF PANDA
      Be the first to leave a con

      related Panda posts

      Istio logo

      Istio

      949
      54
      Open platform to connect, manage, and secure microservices, by Google, IBM, and Lyft
      949
      54
      PROS OF ISTIO
      • 14
        Zero code for logging and monitoring
      • 9
        Service Mesh
      • 8
        Great flexibility
      • 5
        Resiliency
      • 5
        Powerful authorization mechanisms
      • 5
        Ingress controller
      • 4
        Easy integration with Kubernetes and Docker
      • 4
        Full Security
      CONS OF ISTIO
      • 17
        Performance

      related Istio posts

      Shared insights
      on
      IstioIstioDaprDapr

      At my company, we are trying to move away from a monolith into microservices led architecture. We are now stuck with a problem to establish a communication mechanism between microservices. Since, we are planning to use service meshes and something like Dapr/Istio, we are not sure on how to split services between the two. Service meshes offer Traffic Routing or Splitting whereas, Dapr can offer state management and service-service invocation. At the same time both of them provide mLTS, Metrics, Resiliency and tracing. How to choose who should offer what?

      See more
      Anas MOKDAD
      Shared insights
      on
      KongKongIstioIstio

      As for the new support of service mesh pattern by Kong, I wonder how does it compare to Istio?

      See more
      Envoy logo

      Envoy

      296
      9
      C++ front/service proxy
      296
      9
      PROS OF ENVOY
      • 9
        GRPC-Web
      CONS OF ENVOY
        Be the first to leave a con

        related Envoy posts

        Noah Zoschke
        Engineering Manager at Segment · | 30 upvotes · 505K views

        We just launched the Segment Config API (try it out for yourself here) — a set of public REST APIs that enable you to manage your Segment configuration. Behind the scenes the Config API is built with Go , GRPC and Envoy.

        At Segment, we build new services in Go by default. The language is simple so new team members quickly ramp up on a codebase. The tool chain is fast so developers get immediate feedback when they break code, tests or integrations with other systems. The runtime is fast so it performs great at scale.

        For the newest round of APIs we adopted the GRPC service #framework.

        The Protocol Buffer service definition language makes it easy to design type-safe and consistent APIs, thanks to ecosystem tools like the Google API Design Guide for API standards, uber/prototool for formatting and linting .protos and lyft/protoc-gen-validate for defining field validations, and grpc-gateway for defining REST mapping.

        With a well designed .proto, its easy to generate a Go server interface and a TypeScript client, providing type-safe RPC between languages.

        For the API gateway and RPC we adopted the Envoy service proxy.

        The internet-facing segmentapis.com endpoint is an Envoy front proxy that rate-limits and authenticates every request. It then transcodes a #REST / #JSON request to an upstream GRPC request. The upstream GRPC servers are running an Envoy sidecar configured for Datadog stats.

        The result is API #security , #reliability and consistent #observability through Envoy configuration, not code.

        We experimented with Swagger service definitions, but the spec is sprawling and the generated clients and server stubs leave a lot to be desired. GRPC and .proto and the Go implementation feels better designed and implemented. Thanks to the GRPC tooling and ecosystem you can generate Swagger from .protos, but it’s effectively impossible to go the other way.

        See more
        Joseph Irving
        DevOps Engineer at uSwitch · | 7 upvotes · 737.7K views
        Shared insights
        on
        KubernetesKubernetesEnvoyEnvoyGolangGolang
        at

        At uSwitch we wanted a way to load balance between our multiple Kubernetes clusters in AWS to give us added redundancy. We already had ingresses defined for all our applications so we wanted to build on top of that, instead of creating a new system that would require our various teams to change code/config etc.

        Envoy seemed to tick a lot of boxes:

        • Loadbalancing capabilities right out of the box: health checks, circuit breaking, retries etc.
        • Tracing and prometheus metrics support
        • Lightweight
        • Good community support

        This was all good but what really sold us was the api that supported dynamic configuration. This would allow us to dynamically configure envoy to route to ingresses and clusters as they were created or destroyed.

        To do this we built a tool called Yggdrasil using their Go sdk. Yggdrasil effectively just creates envoy configuration from Kubernetes ingress objects, so you point Yggdrasil at your kube clusters, it generates config from the ingresses and then envoy can loadbalance between your clusters for you. This is all done dynamically so as soon as new ingress is created the envoy nodes get updated with the new config. Importantly this all worked with what we already had, no need to create new config for every application, we just put this on top of it.

        See more
        Kong logo

        Kong

        646
        139
        Open Source Microservice & API Management Layer
        646
        139
        PROS OF KONG
        • 37
          Easy to maintain
        • 32
          Easy to install
        • 26
          Flexible
        • 21
          Great performance
        • 7
          Api blueprint
        • 4
          Custom Plugins
        • 3
          Kubernetes-native
        • 2
          Security
        • 2
          Has a good plugin infrastructure
        • 2
          Agnostic
        • 1
          Load balancing
        • 1
          Documentation is clear
        • 1
          Very customizable
        CONS OF KONG
          Be the first to leave a con

          related Kong posts

          Al Tsang
          Problem/Challenge

          We needed a lightweight and completely customizable #microservices #gateway to be able to generate #JWT and introspect #OAuth2 tokens as well. The #gateway was going to front all #APIs for our single page web app as well as externalized #APIs for our partners.

          Contenders

          We looked at Tyk Cloud and Kong. Kong's plugins are all Lua based and its core is NGINX and OpenResty. Although it's open source, it's not the greatest platform to be able to customize. On top of that enterprise features are paid and expensive. Tyk is Go and the nomenclature used within Tyk like "sessions" was bizarre, and again enterprise features were paid.

          Decision

          We ultimately decided to roll our own using ExpressJS into Express Gateway because the use case for using ExpressJS as an #API #gateway was tried and true, in fact - all the enterprise features that the other two charge for #OAuth2 introspection etc were freely available within ExpressJS middleware.

          Outcome

          We opened source Express Gateway with a core set of plugins and the community started writing their own and could quickly do so by rolling lots of ExpressJS middleware into Express Gateway

          See more
          Git logo

          Git

          299.8K
          6.6K
          Fast, scalable, distributed revision control system
          299.8K
          6.6K
          PROS OF GIT
          • 1.4K
            Distributed version control system
          • 1.1K
            Efficient branching and merging
          • 959
            Fast
          • 845
            Open source
          • 726
            Better than svn
          • 368
            Great command-line application
          • 306
            Simple
          • 291
            Free
          • 232
            Easy to use
          • 222
            Does not require server
          • 28
            Distributed
          • 23
            Small & Fast
          • 18
            Feature based workflow
          • 15
            Staging Area
          • 13
            Most wide-spread VSC
          • 11
            Disposable Experimentation
          • 11
            Role-based codelines
          • 7
            Frictionless Context Switching
          • 6
            Data Assurance
          • 5
            Efficient
          • 4
            Just awesome
          • 3
            Easy branching and merging
          • 3
            Github integration
          • 2
            Compatible
          • 2
            Possible to lose history and commits
          • 2
            Flexible
          • 1
            Team Integration
          • 1
            Easy
          • 1
            Light
          • 1
            Fast, scalable, distributed revision control system
          • 1
            Rebase supported natively; reflog; access to plumbing
          • 1
            Flexible, easy, Safe, and fast
          • 1
            CLI is great, but the GUI tools are awesome
          • 1
            It's what you do
          • 0
            Phinx
          CONS OF GIT
          • 16
            Hard to learn
          • 11
            Inconsistent command line interface
          • 9
            Easy to lose uncommitted work
          • 8
            Worst documentation ever possibly made
          • 5
            Awful merge handling
          • 3
            Unexistent preventive security flows
          • 3
            Rebase hell
          • 2
            Ironically even die-hard supporters screw up badly
          • 2
            When --force is disabled, cannot rebase
          • 1
            Doesn't scale for big data

          related Git posts

          Simon Reymann
          Senior Fullstack Developer at QUANTUSflow Software GmbH · | 30 upvotes · 12.1M views

          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.
          See more
          Tymoteusz Paul
          Devops guy at X20X Development LTD · | 23 upvotes · 10.3M views

          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
          GitHub logo

          GitHub

          289.2K
          10.3K
          Powerful collaboration, review, and code management for open source and private development projects
          289.2K
          10.3K
          PROS OF GITHUB
          • 1.8K
            Open source friendly
          • 1.5K
            Easy source control
          • 1.3K
            Nice UI
          • 1.1K
            Great for team collaboration
          • 868
            Easy setup
          • 504
            Issue tracker
          • 487
            Great community
          • 483
            Remote team collaboration
          • 449
            Great way to share
          • 442
            Pull request and features planning
          • 147
            Just works
          • 132
            Integrated in many tools
          • 122
            Free Public Repos
          • 116
            Github Gists
          • 113
            Github pages
          • 83
            Easy to find repos
          • 62
            Open source
          • 60
            Easy to find projects
          • 60
            It's free
          • 56
            Network effect
          • 49
            Extensive API
          • 43
            Organizations
          • 42
            Branching
          • 34
            Developer Profiles
          • 32
            Git Powered Wikis
          • 30
            Great for collaboration
          • 24
            It's fun
          • 23
            Clean interface and good integrations
          • 22
            Community SDK involvement
          • 20
            Learn from others source code
          • 16
            Because: Git
          • 14
            It integrates directly with Azure
          • 10
            Standard in Open Source collab
          • 10
            Newsfeed
          • 8
            Fast
          • 8
            Beautiful user experience
          • 8
            It integrates directly with Hipchat
          • 7
            Easy to discover new code libraries
          • 6
            It's awesome
          • 6
            Smooth integration
          • 6
            Cloud SCM
          • 6
            Nice API
          • 6
            Graphs
          • 6
            Integrations
          • 5
            Hands down best online Git service available
          • 5
            Reliable
          • 5
            Quick Onboarding
          • 5
            CI Integration
          • 5
            Remarkable uptime
          • 4
            Security options
          • 4
            Loved by developers
          • 4
            Uses GIT
          • 4
            Free HTML hosting
          • 4
            Easy to use and collaborate with others
          • 4
            Version Control
          • 4
            Simple but powerful
          • 4
            Unlimited Public Repos at no cost
          • 3
            Nice to use
          • 3
            IAM
          • 3
            Ci
          • 3
            Easy deployment via SSH
          • 2
            Free private repos
          • 2
            Good tools support
          • 2
            All in one development service
          • 2
            Never dethroned
          • 2
            Easy source control and everything is backed up
          • 2
            Issues tracker
          • 2
            Self Hosted
          • 2
            IAM integration
          • 2
            Very Easy to Use
          • 2
            Easy to use
          • 2
            Leads the copycats
          • 2
            Free HTML hostings
          • 2
            Easy and efficient maintainance of the projects
          • 2
            Beautiful
          • 1
            Dasf
          • 1
            Profound
          CONS OF GITHUB
          • 55
            Owned by micrcosoft
          • 38
            Expensive for lone developers that want private repos
          • 15
            Relatively slow product/feature release cadence
          • 10
            API scoping could be better
          • 9
            Only 3 collaborators for private repos
          • 4
            Limited featureset for issue management
          • 3
            Does not have a graph for showing history like git lens
          • 2
            GitHub Packages does not support SNAPSHOT versions
          • 1
            Horrible review comments tracking (absence)
          • 1
            Takes a long time to commit
          • 1
            No multilingual interface
          • 1
            Expensive

          related GitHub posts

          Johnny Bell

          I was building a personal project that I needed to store items in a real time database. I am more comfortable with my Frontend skills than my backend so I didn't want to spend time building out anything in Ruby or Go.

          I stumbled on Firebase by #Google, and it was really all I needed. It had realtime data, an area for storing file uploads and best of all for the amount of data I needed it was free!

          I built out my application using tools I was familiar with, React for the framework, Redux.js to manage my state across components, and styled-components for the styling.

          Now as this was a project I was just working on in my free time for fun I didn't really want to pay for hosting. I did some research and I found Netlify. I had actually seen them at #ReactRally the year before and deployed a Gatsby site to Netlify already.

          Netlify was very easy to setup and link to my GitHub account you select a repo and pretty much with very little configuration you have a live site that will deploy every time you push to master.

          With the selection of these tools I was able to build out my application, connect it to a realtime database, and deploy to a live environment all with $0 spent.

          If you're looking to build out a small app I suggest giving these tools a go as you can get your idea out into the real world for absolutely no cost.

          See more

          Context: I wanted to create an end to end IoT data pipeline simulation in Google Cloud IoT Core and other GCP services. I never touched Terraform meaningfully until working on this project, and it's one of the best explorations in my development career. The documentation and syntax is incredibly human-readable and friendly. I'm used to building infrastructure through the google apis via Python , but I'm so glad past Sung did not make that decision. I was tempted to use Google Cloud Deployment Manager, but the templates were a bit convoluted by first impression. I'm glad past Sung did not make this decision either.

          Solution: Leveraging Google Cloud Build Google Cloud Run Google Cloud Bigtable Google BigQuery Google Cloud Storage Google Compute Engine along with some other fun tools, I can deploy over 40 GCP resources using Terraform!

          Check Out My Architecture: CLICK ME

          Check out the GitHub repo attached

          See more
          Visual Studio Code logo

          Visual Studio Code

          181.7K
          2.3K
          Build and debug modern web and cloud applications, by Microsoft
          181.7K
          2.3K
          PROS OF VISUAL STUDIO CODE
          • 340
            Powerful multilanguage IDE
          • 308
            Fast
          • 193
            Front-end develop out of the box
          • 158
            Support TypeScript IntelliSense
          • 142
            Very basic but free
          • 126
            Git integration
          • 106
            Intellisense
          • 78
            Faster than Atom
          • 53
            Better ui, easy plugins, and nice git integration
          • 45
            Great Refactoring Tools
          • 44
            Good Plugins
          • 42
            Terminal
          • 38
            Superb markdown support
          • 36
            Open Source
          • 35
            Extensions
          • 26
            Awesome UI
          • 26
            Large & up-to-date extension community
          • 24
            Powerful and fast
          • 22
            Portable
          • 18
            Best code editor
          • 18
            Best editor
          • 17
            Easy to get started with
          • 15
            Lots of extensions
          • 15
            Good for begginers
          • 15
            Crossplatform
          • 15
            Built on Electron
          • 14
            Extensions for everything
          • 14
            Open, cross-platform, fast, monthly updates
          • 14
            All Languages Support
          • 13
            Easy to use and learn
          • 12
            "fast, stable & easy to use"
          • 12
            Extensible
          • 11
            Ui design is great
          • 11
            Totally customizable
          • 11
            Git out of the box
          • 11
            Useful for begginer
          • 11
            Faster edit for slow computer
          • 10
            SSH support
          • 10
            Great community
          • 10
            Fast Startup
          • 9
            Works With Almost EveryThing You Need
          • 9
            Great language support
          • 9
            Powerful Debugger
          • 9
            It has terminal and there are lots of shortcuts in it
          • 8
            Can compile and run .py files
          • 8
            Python extension is fast
          • 7
            Features rich
          • 7
            Great document formater
          • 6
            He is not Michael
          • 6
            Extension Echosystem
          • 6
            She is not Rachel
          • 6
            Awesome multi cursor support
          • 5
            VSCode.pro Course makes it easy to learn
          • 5
            Language server client
          • 5
            SFTP Workspace
          • 5
            Very proffesional
          • 5
            Easy azure
          • 4
            Has better support and more extentions for debugging
          • 4
            Supports lots of operating systems
          • 4
            Excellent as git difftool and mergetool
          • 4
            Virtualenv integration
          • 3
            Better autocompletes than Atom
          • 3
            Has more than enough languages for any developer
          • 3
            'batteries included'
          • 3
            More tools to integrate with vs
          • 3
            Emmet preinstalled
          • 2
            VS Code Server: Browser version of VS Code
          • 2
            CMake support with autocomplete
          • 2
            Microsoft
          • 2
            Customizable
          • 2
            Light
          • 2
            Big extension marketplace
          • 2
            Fast and ruby is built right in
          • 1
            File:///C:/Users/ydemi/Downloads/yuksel_demirkaya_webpa
          CONS OF VISUAL STUDIO CODE
          • 46
            Slow startup
          • 29
            Resource hog at times
          • 20
            Poor refactoring
          • 13
            Poor UI Designer
          • 11
            Weak Ui design tools
          • 10
            Poor autocomplete
          • 8
            Super Slow
          • 8
            Huge cpu usage with few installed extension
          • 8
            Microsoft sends telemetry data
          • 7
            Poor in PHP
          • 6
            It's MicroSoft
          • 3
            Poor in Python
          • 3
            No Built in Browser Preview
          • 3
            No color Intergrator
          • 3
            Very basic for java development and buggy at times
          • 3
            No built in live Preview
          • 3
            Electron
          • 2
            Bad Plugin Architecture
          • 2
            Powered by Electron
          • 1
            Terminal does not identify path vars sometimes
          • 1
            Slow C++ Language Server

          related Visual Studio Code posts

          Yshay Yaacobi

          Our first experience with .NET core was when we developed our OSS feature management platform - Tweek (https://github.com/soluto/tweek). We wanted to create a solution that is able to run anywhere (super important for OSS), has excellent performance characteristics and can fit in a multi-container architecture. We decided to implement our rule engine processor in F# , our main service was implemented in C# and other components were built using JavaScript / TypeScript and Go.

          Visual Studio Code worked really well for us as well, it worked well with all our polyglot services and the .Net core integration had great cross-platform developer experience (to be fair, F# was a bit trickier) - actually, each of our team members used a different OS (Ubuntu, macos, windows). Our production deployment ran for a time on Docker Swarm until we've decided to adopt Kubernetes with almost seamless migration process.

          After our positive experience of running .Net core workloads in containers and developing Tweek's .Net services on non-windows machines, C# had gained back some of its popularity (originally lost to Node.js), and other teams have been using it for developing microservices, k8s sidecars (like https://github.com/Soluto/airbag), cli tools, serverless functions and other projects...

          See more
          Simon Reymann
          Senior Fullstack Developer at QUANTUSflow Software GmbH · | 30 upvotes · 12.1M views

          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.
          See more
          Docker logo

          Docker

          176.2K
          3.9K
          Enterprise Container Platform for High-Velocity Innovation.
          176.2K
          3.9K
          PROS OF DOCKER
          • 823
            Rapid integration and build up
          • 692
            Isolation
          • 521
            Open source
          • 505
            Testa­bil­i­ty and re­pro­ducibil­i­ty
          • 460
            Lightweight
          • 218
            Standardization
          • 185
            Scalable
          • 106
            Upgrading / down­grad­ing / ap­pli­ca­tion versions
          • 88
            Security
          • 85
            Private paas environments
          • 34
            Portability
          • 26
            Limit resource usage
          • 17
            Game changer
          • 16
            I love the way docker has changed virtualization
          • 14
            Fast
          • 12
            Concurrency
          • 8
            Docker's Compose tools
          • 6
            Easy setup
          • 6
            Fast and Portable
          • 5
            Because its fun
          • 4
            Makes shipping to production very simple
          • 3
            Highly useful
          • 3
            It's dope
          • 2
            Package the environment with the application
          • 2
            Super
          • 2
            Open source and highly configurable
          • 2
            Simplicity, isolation, resource effective
          • 2
            MacOS support FAKE
          • 2
            Its cool
          • 2
            Does a nice job hogging memory
          • 2
            Docker hub for the FTW
          • 2
            HIgh Throughput
          • 2
            Very easy to setup integrate and build
          • 0
            Asdfd
          CONS OF DOCKER
          • 8
            New versions == broken features
          • 6
            Unreliable networking
          • 6
            Documentation not always in sync
          • 4
            Moves quickly
          • 3
            Not Secure

          related Docker posts

          Simon Reymann
          Senior Fullstack Developer at QUANTUSflow Software GmbH · | 30 upvotes · 12.1M views

          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.
          See more
          Tymoteusz Paul
          Devops guy at X20X Development LTD · | 23 upvotes · 10.3M views

          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