Docker Compose vs Yarn

Overview

Docker Compose

Stacks22.3K

Followers16.5K

Votes501

GitHub Stars36.4K

Forks5.5K

Yarn

Stacks28.2K

Followers13.5K

Votes151

GitHub Stars41.5K

Forks2.7K

Docker Compose vs Yarn: What are the differences?

Introduction: Docker Compose and Yarn are both powerful tools commonly used in web development. Understanding the key differences between Docker Compose and Yarn can help developers choose the most suitable tool for their specific needs.

Installation Process: Docker Compose is typically installed as part of the Docker Desktop installation, making it convenient for users already working with Docker. On the other hand, Yarn requires a separate installation process, adding an extra step for developers who may not already have it set up.
Use Case: Docker Compose is primarily used for defining and running multi-container Docker applications, allowing developers to orchestrate multiple services easily. Yarn, however, is a package manager that focuses on dependency management and project workflows, specifically within the context of JavaScript and Node.js projects.
Configuration Complexity: Docker Compose configuration involves defining services, networks, and volumes in a YAML file, which can be complex for beginners but offers robust customization options. In contrast, Yarn's configuration is simpler, mainly focusing on managing installed packages and script commands within a project.
Dependency Management: Yarn tracks dependencies more efficiently by creating a lock file that ensures consistent installs across different environments. Docker Compose, while capable of managing dependencies within containers, does not offer the same level of dependency tracking and version control as Yarn.
Workflow Integration: Yarn seamlessly integrates with other tools commonly used in JavaScript development, such as Webpack and Babel, enhancing the overall workflow for front-end projects. Docker Compose, while versatile, may require additional configuration to work smoothly with specific development workflows and tools used in the project.
Resource Usage: Docker Compose, due to its containerized approach, consumes more system resources compared to Yarn, which operates at the package management level. Depending on the project requirements and hardware constraints, developers need to consider the potential impact on system performance when choosing between the two tools.

In Summary, Docker Compose excels in orchestrating multi-container applications with customizable configurations, while Yarn focuses on efficient dependency management and streamlined project workflows in JavaScript and Node.js environments.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Advice on Docker Compose, Yarn

StackShare

Apr 23, 2019

Needs adviceon

Node.js

npm

Yarn

From a StackShare Community member: “I’m a freelance web developer (I mostly use Node.js) and for future projects I’m debating between npm or Yarn as my default package manager. I’m a minimalist so I hate installing software if I don’t need to- in this case that would be Yarn. For those who made the switch from npm to Yarn, what benefits have you noticed? For those who stuck with npm, are you happy you with it?"

294k views294k

Comments

zen-li

Apr 24, 2019

Reviewon

Yarn

p.s.

I am not sure about the performance of the latest version of npm, whether it is different from my understanding of it below. Because I use npm very rarely when I had the following knowledge.

------⏬

I use Yarn because, first, yarn is the first tool to lock the version. Second, although npm also supports the lock version, when you use npm to lock the version, and then use package-lock.json on other systems, package-lock.json Will be modified. You understand what I mean, when you deploy projects based on Git...

250k views250k

Comments

Oleksandr

Senior Software Engineer at joyn

Dec 7, 2019

Decided

As we have to build the application for many different TV platforms we want to split the application logic from the device/platform specific code. Previously we had different repositories and it was very hard to keep the development process when changes were done in multiple repositories, as we had to synchronize code reviews as well as merging and then updating the dependencies of projects. This issues would be even more critical when building the project from scratch what we did at Joyn. Therefor to keep all code in one place, at the same time keeping in separated in different modules we decided to give a try to monorepo. First we tried out lerna which was fine at the beginning, but later along the way we had issues with adding new dependencies which came out of the blue and were not easy to fix. Next round of evolution was yarn workspaces, we are still using it and are pretty happy with dev experience it provides. And one more advantage we got when switched to yarn workspaces that we also switched from npm to yarn what improved the state of the lock file a lot, because with npm package-lock file was updated every time you run npm install, frequent updates of package-lock file were causing very often merge conflicts. So right now we not just having faster dependencies installation time but also no conflicts coming from lock file.

310k views310k

Comments

Detailed Comparison

Docker Compose	Yarn
With Compose, you define a multi-container application in a single file, then spin your application up in a single command which does everything that needs to be done to get it running.	Yarn caches every package it downloads so it never needs to again. It also parallelizes operations to maximize resource utilization so install times are faster than ever.
Statistics
GitHub Stars 36.4K	GitHub Stars 41.5K
GitHub Forks 5.5K	GitHub Forks 2.7K
Stacks 22.3K	Stacks 28.2K
Followers 16.5K	Followers 13.5K
Votes 501	Votes 151
Pros & Cons
Pros 123 Multi-container descriptor 110 Fast development environment setup 79 Easy linking of containers 68 Simple yaml configuration 60 Easy setup Cons 9 Tied to single machine 5 Still very volatile, changing syntax often	Pros 85 Incredibly fast 22 Easy to use 13 Open Source 11 Can install any npm package 8 Works where npm fails Cons 16 Facebook 7 Sends data to facebook 4 Should be installed separately 3 Cannot publish to registry other than npm
Integrations
Docker	JavaScript npm

What are some alternatives to Docker Compose, Yarn?

npm

npm is the command-line interface to the npm ecosystem. It is battle-tested, surprisingly flexible, and used by hundreds of thousands of JavaScript developers every day.

Kubernetes

Kubernetes is an open source orchestration system for Docker containers. It handles scheduling onto nodes in a compute cluster and actively manages workloads to ensure that their state matches the users declared intentions.

Rancher

Rancher is an open source container management platform that includes full distributions of Kubernetes, Apache Mesos and Docker Swarm, and makes it simple to operate container clusters on any cloud or infrastructure platform.

RequireJS

RequireJS loads plain JavaScript files as well as more defined modules. It is optimized for in-browser use, including in a Web Worker, but it can be used in other JavaScript environments, like Rhino and Node. It implements the Asynchronous Module API. Using a modular script loader like RequireJS will improve the speed and quality of your code.

Docker Swarm

Swarm serves the standard Docker API, so any tool which already communicates with a Docker daemon can use Swarm to transparently scale to multiple hosts: Dokku, Compose, Krane, Deis, DockerUI, Shipyard, Drone, Jenkins... and, of course, the Docker client itself.

Browserify

Browserify lets you require('modules') in the browser by bundling up all of your dependencies.

Tutum

Tutum lets developers easily manage and run lightweight, portable, self-sufficient containers from any application. AWS-like control, Heroku-like ease. The same container that a developer builds and tests on a laptop can run at scale in Tutum.

Portainer

It is a universal container management tool. It works with Kubernetes, Docker, Docker Swarm and Azure ACI. It allows you to manage containers without needing to know platform-specific code.

Codefresh

Automate and parallelize testing. Codefresh allows teams to spin up on-demand compositions to run unit and integration tests as part of the continuous integration process. Jenkins integration allows more complex pipelines.

Component

Component's philosophy is the UNIX philosophy of the web - to create a platform for small, reusable components that consist of JS, CSS, HTML, images, fonts, etc. With its well-defined specs, using Component means not worrying about most frontend problems such as package management, publishing components to a registry, or creating a custom build process for every single app.

Related Comparisons

Docker Compose vs Yarn: What are the differences?

Installation Process: Docker Compose is typically installed as part of the Docker Desktop installation, making it convenient for users already working with Docker. On the other hand, Yarn requires a separate installation process, adding an extra step for developers who may not already have it set up.
Use Case: Docker Compose is primarily used for defining and running multi-container Docker applications, allowing developers to orchestrate multiple services easily. Yarn, however, is a package manager that focuses on dependency management and project workflows, specifically within the context of JavaScript and Node.js projects.
Configuration Complexity: Docker Compose configuration involves defining services, networks, and volumes in a YAML file, which can be complex for beginners but offers robust customization options. In contrast, Yarn's configuration is simpler, mainly focusing on managing installed packages and script commands within a project.
Dependency Management: Yarn tracks dependencies more efficiently by creating a lock file that ensures consistent installs across different environments. Docker Compose, while capable of managing dependencies within containers, does not offer the same level of dependency tracking and version control as Yarn.
Workflow Integration: Yarn seamlessly integrates with other tools commonly used in JavaScript development, such as Webpack and Babel, enhancing the overall workflow for front-end projects. Docker Compose, while versatile, may require additional configuration to work smoothly with specific development workflows and tools used in the project.
Resource Usage: Docker Compose, due to its containerized approach, consumes more system resources compared to Yarn, which operates at the package management level. Depending on the project requirements and hardware constraints, developers need to consider the potential impact on system performance when choosing between the two tools.

Docker Compose vs Yarn

Overview