Chef vs Docker: What are the differences?
Developers describe Chef as "Build, destroy and rebuild servers on any public or private cloud". Chef enables you to manage and scale cloud infrastructure with no downtime or interruptions. Freely move applications and configurations from one cloud to another. Chef is integrated with all major cloud providers including Amazon EC2, VMWare, IBM Smartcloud, Rackspace, OpenStack, Windows Azure, HP Cloud, Google Compute Engine, Joyent Cloud and others. On the other hand, Docker is detailed as "Enterprise Container Platform for High-Velocity Innovation". 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.
Chef belongs to "Server Configuration and Automation" category of the tech stack, while Docker can be primarily classified under "Virtual Machine Platforms & Containers".
Some of the features offered by Chef are:
- Access to 800+ Reusable Cookbooks
- Integration with Leading Cloud Providers
- Enterprise Platform Support including Windows and Solaris
On the other hand, Docker provides the following key features:
- Integrated developer tools
- open, portable images
- shareable, reusable apps
"Dynamic and idempotent server configuration" is the top reason why over 104 developers like Chef, while over 816 developers mention "Rapid integration and build up" as the leading cause for choosing Docker.
Chef and Docker are both open source tools. Docker with 54K GitHub stars and 15.6K forks on GitHub appears to be more popular than Chef with 5.86K GitHub stars and 2.36K GitHub forks.
According to the StackShare community, Docker has a broader approval, being mentioned in 3527 company stacks & 3449 developers stacks; compared to Chef, which is listed in 359 company stacks and 80 developer stacks.
What is Chef?
What is Docker?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Sign up to add, upvote and see more prosMake informed product decisions
What are the cons of using Chef?
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions
Docker is the new kid on the block disrupting virtualization nowadays. You're able to save up to 70% of your development cost on AWS (or any other cloud) switching to Docker. For example instead of paying for many small VMs you can spin up a large one with many Docker containers to drastically lower your cost. That alone is only one of the reasons why Docker is the future and it's not even the best feature: isolation, testability, reproducibility, standardization, security, and upgrading / downgrading / application versions to name a few. You can spin up 1000's of Docker containers on an ordinary Laptop, but you would have trouble spinning up 100's of VMs. If you haven't already checked out Docker you're missing out on a huge opportunity to join the movement that will change development/production environments forever
The support for macOS is a fake.
I can't work with docker in macOS because de network and comunications with the container don't works correctly.
Currently experimenting. The idea is to isolate any services where I'm not confident yet in their security/quality. The hope is that if there is an exploit in a given service that an attacker won't be able break out of the docker container and cause damage to my systems.
An example of a service I would isolate in a docker container would be a minecraft browser map application I use. I don't know who wrote it, I don't know who's vetting it, I don't know the source code. I would feel a lot better putting this in a container before I expose it to the internet.
I believe I will follow this process for anything that's not properly maintained (not in an trusted apt-repo or some other sort of confidence)
We are testing out docker at the moment, building images from successful staging builds for all our APIs. Since we operate in a SOA (not quite microservices), developers have a dockerfile that they can run to build the entirety of our api infrastructure on their machines. We use the successful builds from staging to power these instances allowing them to do some more manual integration testing across systems.
Each component of the app was launched in a separate container, so that they wouldn't have to share resources: the front end in one, the back end in another, a third for celery, a fourth for celery-beat, and a fifth for RabbitMQ. Actually, we ended up running four front-end containers and eight back-end, due to load constraints.
Linux containers are so much more lightweight than VMs which is quite important for my limited budget. However, Docker has much more support and tooling for it unlike LXC, hence why I use it. rkt is interesting, although I will probably stick with Docker due to being more widespread.
We are running primarily as a micro-services platform and Docker lets us iterate on these smaller units consistently from dev to staging to production. It is also integral to our continuous deployment system for rolling out or rolling back new features.
Out custom recipes makes it simple for developers bootstrap process (using vagrant) and that same recipe is also the one that is used to prep instances