Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Azure Functions vs Google Cloud Functions: What are the differences?
Introduction
Azure Functions and Google Cloud Functions are serverless computing platforms offered by Microsoft Azure and Google Cloud respectively. Despite being similar in concept, there are several key differences between the two platforms that set them apart in terms of features, capabilities, and integration options. This article will outline the six key differences between Azure Functions and Google Cloud Functions.
Programming Languages Support: Azure Functions supports a wide range of programming languages including C#, JavaScript, Python, PowerShell, and TypeScript, offering developers the flexibility to choose their preferred language. On the other hand, Google Cloud Functions primarily focuses on JavaScript and Node.js, limiting the language options available to developers.
Integration Options: Azure Functions provide seamless integration with other Azure services such as Azure Blob Storage, Azure Cosmos DB, Azure Event Hubs, and Azure Service Bus. This allows developers to easily build serverless workflows and trigger functions based on events from various Azure services. In comparison, Google Cloud Functions also offers integrations with various Google Cloud services like Cloud Storage, Pub/Sub, and Firestore, but the range of integrations is somewhat limited compared to Azure.
Scaling and Performance: Azure Functions leverages the dynamic scaling capabilities of Azure App Service, enabling automatic scaling of functions based on the workload. This ensures that functions can handle spikes in traffic efficiently. Google Cloud Functions also offers automatic scaling based on the number of incoming requests, but there have been instances where Azure Functions has shown better performance and faster cold start times.
Pricing Structure: Azure Functions pricing is based on the number of executions, execution time, and memory consumption, allowing users to optimize costs based on their specific requirements. Google Cloud Functions, on the other hand, follows a similar pricing model but also takes into account the number of compute resources used, which can sometimes make it harder to estimate costs accurately.
Development and Deployment Experience: Azure Functions can be developed and deployed directly within the Azure portal, making it easy for developers to manage and monitor their functions. It also provides a local development environment through the Azure Functions Core Tools. In contrast, Google Cloud Functions relies on the use of the Google Cloud Console or command-line tools for development and deployment, which might require additional setup and configuration steps.
Vendor Lock-in and Portability: Azure Functions are tightly integrated with the Azure ecosystem, making it easier to leverage other Azure services, but it also creates a tighter coupling with Azure, potentially resulting in more vendor lock-in. Google Cloud Functions, on the other hand, offers a more portable solution that can be deployed and run across different cloud providers through the use of Knative, an open-source platform for building serverless workloads.
In Summary, the key differences between Azure Functions and Google Cloud Functions lie in programming language support, integration options, scaling and performance, pricing structure, development and deployment experience, and vendor lock-in and portability.
Need advice on what platform, systems and tools to use.
Evaluating whether to start a new digital business for which we will need to build a website that handles all traffic. Website only right now. May add smartphone apps later. No desktop app will ever be added. Website to serve various countries and languages. B2B and B2C type customers. Need to handle heavy traffic, be low cost, and scale well.
We are open to either build it on AWS or on Microsoft Azure.
Apologies if I'm leaving out some info. My first post. :) Thanks in advance!
I recommend this : -Spring reactive for back end : the fact it's reactive (async) it consumes half of the resources that a sync platform needs (so less CPU -> less money). -Angular : Web Front end ; it's gives you the possibility to use PWA which is a cheap replacement for a mobile app (but more less popular). -Docker images. -Kubernetes to orchestrate all the containers. -I Use Jenkins / blueocean, ansible for my CI/CD (with Github of course) -AWS of course : u can run a K8S cluster there, make it multi AZ (availability zones) to be highly available, use a load balancer and an auto scaler and ur good to go. -You can store data by taking any managed DB or u can deploy ur own (cheap but risky).
You pay less money, but u need some technical 2 - 3 guys to make that done.
Good luck
My advice will be Front end: React Backend: Language: Java, Kotlin. Database: SQL: Postgres, MySQL, Aurora NOSQL: Mongo db. Caching: Redis. Public : Spring Webflux for async public facing operation. Admin api: Spring boot, Hibrernate, Rest API. Build Container image. Kuberenetes: AWS EKS, AWS ECS, Google GKE. Use Jenkins for CI/CD pipeline. Buddy works is good for AWS. Static content: Host on AWS S3 bucket, Use Cloudfront or Cloudflare as CDN.
Serverless Solution: Api gateway Lambda, Serveless Aurora (SQL). AWS S3 bucket.
Run cloud service containers instead of cloud-native services
- Running containers means that your microservices are not "cooked" into a cloud provider's architecture.
- Moving from one cloud to the next means that you simply spin up new instances of your containers in the new cloud using that cloud's container service.
- Start redirecting your traffic to the new resources.
- Turn off the containers in the cloud you migrated from.
Pros of Azure Functions
- Pay only when invoked14
- Great developer experience for C#11
- Multiple languages supported9
- Great debugging support7
- Can be used as lightweight https service5
- Easy scalability4
- WebHooks3
- Costo3
- Event driven2
- Azure component events for Storage, services etc2
- Poor developer experience for C#2
Pros of Google Cloud Functions
- Serverless Applications7
- Its not AWS5
- Simplicity4
- Free Tiers and Trainging3
- Simple config with GitLab CI/CD2
- Built-in Webhook trigger1
- Typescript Support1
- Blaze, pay as you go1
- Customer Support1
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Azure Functions
- No persistent (writable) file system available1
- Poor support for Linux environments1
- Sporadic server & language runtime issues1
- Not suited for long-running applications1
Cons of Google Cloud Functions
- Node.js only1
- Typescript Support0
- Blaze, pay as you go0