AWS Firecracker vs Apache OpenWhisk: What are the differences?

Introduction

In this article, we will discuss the key differences between AWS Firecracker and Apache OpenWhisk. Both AWS Firecracker and Apache OpenWhisk are innovative serverless computing solutions that offer unique features and capabilities.

1. Performance and Isolation: One of the key differences between AWS Firecracker and Apache OpenWhisk is the approach to performance and isolation. Firecracker is designed for running lightweight, secure, and fast microVMs. It provides a high level of isolation and security by using a combination of hardware virtualization (KVM) and software-defined virtualization. On the other hand, Apache OpenWhisk uses lightweight containers (Docker) to execute workloads. While containers offer good performance, they may not provide the same level of isolation as Firecracker's microVMs.

2. Scaling and Resource Utilization: Another important difference is the scaling and resource utilization capabilities. AWS Firecracker is designed to be highly efficient in terms of resource utilization. It has low overhead, fast startup time, and can scale up or down quickly based on demand. It is optimized for scenarios where there is a need for running multiple isolated workloads simultaneously. In contrast, Apache OpenWhisk provides automatic scaling based on rules and triggers defined by the user. It can scale out to accommodate increased workload but may not be as efficient in terms of resource utilization as Firecracker.

3. Language Support and Flexibility: AWS Firecracker supports a wide range of operating systems and programming languages. It provides flexibility in terms of choosing the right combination that suits the specific use case. Firecracker allows users to run any Linux-based OS and execute any compatible workload. Apache OpenWhisk, on the other hand, is built on open standards and supports multiple programming languages including Node.js, Python, and Java. It offers a higher level of abstraction and simplifies the development of serverless applications.

4. Community and Ecosystem: Both AWS Firecracker and Apache OpenWhisk have active communities and ecosystems. However, Firecracker is primarily driven and maintained by AWS, which provides extensive documentation and support. The Firecracker community continues to grow, with contributions from AWS and other developers. Apache OpenWhisk, being an open-source project, has a diverse community of contributors and users. It benefits from the collective knowledge and experience of the community, and users can contribute to its development and improvement.

5. Pricing and Hosting Options: AWS Firecracker is a service provided by Amazon Web Services and is available as part of AWS Lambda. The pricing for Firecracker is based on the usage of other AWS services. Apache OpenWhisk, being an open-source solution, is free to use and can be hosted on various platforms including on-premises servers, public cloud, or hybrid environments. This provides users with the flexibility to choose the hosting option that best suits their needs and budget.

6. Integration and Interoperability: Another difference between AWS Firecracker and Apache OpenWhisk is the integration and interoperability capabilities. Firecracker is tightly integrated with other AWS services, such as AWS Lambda and AWS Fargate, allowing seamless integration as part of a larger serverless architecture. Apache OpenWhisk, being an open-source platform, provides integration options with various third-party services and platforms. It offers flexibility in terms of integrating with different tools and technologies to build comprehensive serverless solutions.

In summary, AWS Firecracker and Apache OpenWhisk differ in terms of performance and isolation, scaling and resource utilization, language support and flexibility, community and ecosystem, pricing and hosting options, and integration and interoperability capabilities. Users can choose the solution that aligns with their specific requirements and use cases.