CircleCI聽vs聽Snap CI

Get Advice Icon

Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

CircleCI
CircleCI

3.7K
2.2K
+ 1
941
Snap CI
Snap CI

29
33
+ 1
100
Add tool

CircleCI vs Snap CI: What are the differences?

CircleCI: Automate your development process quickly, safely, and at scale. Continuous integration and delivery platform helps software teams rapidly release code with confidence by automating the build, test, and deploy process. Offers a modern software development platform that lets teams ramp; Snap CI: Build, test, and deploy software faster with Snap's continuous integration and deployment tool. Snap CI is a cloud-based continuous integration & continuous deployment tool with powerful deployment pipelines. Integrates seamlessly with GitHub and provides fast feedback so you can deploy with ease.

CircleCI and Snap CI can be primarily classified as "Continuous Integration" tools.

Some of the features offered by CircleCI are:

  • Language-Inclusive Support
  • Custom Environments
  • Flexible Resource Allocation

On the other hand, Snap CI provides the following key features:

  • Deployment Options - Heroku, AWS
  • System Libraries - Your build runs on a RedHat 6-compatible system with commonly required libraries
  • Customization Options - In addition to all that we support out of the box, we offer you the chance to customize your build extensively.

"Github integration" is the top reason why over 218 developers like CircleCI, while over 13 developers mention "Github integration" as the leading cause for choosing Snap CI.

Instacart, Lyft, and StackShare are some of the popular companies that use CircleCI, whereas Snap CI is used by ThoughtWorks, Hazeorid, and Firecracker. CircleCI has a broader approval, being mentioned in 943 company stacks & 388 developers stacks; compared to Snap CI, which is listed in 7 company stacks and 3 developer stacks.

- No public GitHub repository available -
- No public GitHub repository available -

What is CircleCI?

Continuous integration and delivery platform helps software teams rapidly release code with confidence by automating the build, test, and deploy process. Offers a modern software development platform that lets teams ramp.

What is Snap CI?

Snap CI is a cloud-based continuous integration & continuous deployment tool with powerful deployment pipelines. Integrates seamlessly with GitHub and provides fast feedback so you can deploy with ease.
Get Advice Icon

Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

Why do developers choose CircleCI?
Why do developers choose Snap CI?

Sign up to add, upvote and see more prosMake informed product decisions

    Be the first to leave a con
    What companies use CircleCI?
    What companies use Snap CI?

    Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions

    What tools integrate with CircleCI?
    What tools integrate with Snap CI?

    Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions

    What are some alternatives to CircleCI and Snap CI?
    Jenkins
    In a nutshell Jenkins CI is the leading open-source continuous integration server. Built with Java, it provides over 300 plugins to support building and testing virtually any project.
    Travis CI
    Free for open source projects, our CI environment provides multiple runtimes (e.g. Node.js or PHP versions), data stores and so on. Because of this, hosting your project on travis-ci.com means you can effortlessly test your library or applications against multiple runtimes and data stores without even having all of them installed locally.
    Codeship
    Codeship runs your automated tests and configured deployment when you push to your repository. It takes care of managing and scaling the infrastructure so that you are able to test and release more frequently and get faster feedback for building the product your users need.
    Azure DevOps
    Azure DevOps provides unlimited private Git hosting, cloud build for continuous integration, agile planning, and release management for continuous delivery to the cloud and on-premises. Includes broad IDE support.
    Concourse
    Concourse's principles reduce the risk of switching to and from Concourse, by encouraging practices that decouple your project from your CI's little details, and keeping all configuration in declarative files that can be checked into version control.
    See all alternatives
    Decisions about CircleCI and Snap CI
    Tymoteusz Paul
    Tymoteusz Paul
    Devops guy at X20X Development LTD | 15 upvotes 388.3K 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
    CircleCI
    CircleCI
    Travis CI
    Travis CI

    I initially chose CircleCI for a personal project because I was not satisified with using Travis CI in the past. When it came time to develop my CI/CD config on Circle, I was pleasantly surprised with the fantastic documentation, invaluable collection of example configs and helpful support provided. The free tier they provide is quite robust for most small projects and the platform is updated frequently with nice features.

    Areas where CircleCI could improve:

    • the UI is a bit slow (you can feel the local machine straining to load all the code) and it is not as intuitive as it could be
    • many UI elements receive updates and/or changes that are not always reflected in the current docs
    See more
    Sebastian G臋bski
    Sebastian G臋bski
    CTO at Shedul/Fresha | 4 upvotes 260.1K views
    atFresha EngineeringFresha Engineering
    CircleCI
    CircleCI
    Jenkins
    Jenkins
    Git
    Git
    GitHub
    GitHub
    New Relic
    New Relic
    AppSignal
    AppSignal
    Sentry
    Sentry
    Logentries
    Logentries

    Regarding Continuous Integration - we've started with something very easy to set up - CircleCI , but with time we're adding more & more complex pipelines - we use Jenkins to configure & run those. It's much more effort, but at some point we had to pay for the flexibility we expected. Our source code version control is Git (which probably doesn't require a rationale these days) and we keep repos in GitHub - since the very beginning & we never considered moving out. Our primary monitoring these days is in New Relic (Ruby & SPA apps) and AppSignal (Elixir apps) - we're considering unifying it in New Relic , but this will require some improvements in Elixir app observability. For error reporting we use Sentry (a very popular choice in this class) & we collect our distributed logs using Logentries (to avoid semi-manual handling here).

    See more
    Sebastian Dellwig
    Sebastian Dellwig
    Tech Lead at Porsche Digital GmbH | 6 upvotes 35.1K views
    GitLab CI
    GitLab CI
    CircleCI
    CircleCI
    Codeship
    Codeship

    We are using GitLab CI and were very happy with it. The integration of all tools like CI/CD, tickets, etc makes it very easy to stay on top of things. But be aware, Gitlab currently does not have iOS build support. So if you want to exchange that for CircleCI / Codeship to have to invest some effort. We are using a managed Mac OS device and installed the Gitlab runner there, to have iOS builds.

    See more
    Tim Abbott
    Tim Abbott
    Founder at Zulip | 13 upvotes 44.3K views
    atZulipZulip
    Travis CI
    Travis CI
    CircleCI
    CircleCI
    <