FaaS vs Kubernetes

Overview

Kubernetes

Stacks61.2K

Followers52.8K

Votes685

FaaS

Stacks5

Followers28

Votes1

FaaS vs Kubernetes: What are the differences?

Introduction

In the realm of cloud computing, there are two popular options for managing containerized applications: FaaS (Function as a Service) and Kubernetes. Both offer unique advantages and choosing between them depends on specific needs and requirements. Below are the key differences between FaaS and Kubernetes.

Scalability: FaaS platforms like AWS Lambda automatically scale based on incoming requests, allowing for efficient resource utilization and cost-effectiveness. On the other hand, Kubernetes provides more control over scalability as it allows users to manually scale deployments based on specific resource requirements and application demands.
Resource Allocation: FaaS abstracts infrastructure management, making it easier for developers to focus solely on code without worrying about underlying resources. In contrast, Kubernetes requires users to manage resource allocation, including CPU, memory, and storage, giving them more control over the infrastructure configuration.
Deployment Complexity: FaaS simplifies deployment by providing a serverless environment where developers can upload their functions for execution without having to manage servers. Kubernetes, while offering flexibility, requires users to set up and maintain a cluster, which can be more complex and time-consuming.
Scheduled Tasks: Kubernetes supports cron jobs for executing periodic tasks, making it suitable for applications that require scheduled operations. FaaS platforms may not have built-in support for scheduled tasks, requiring developers to implement workarounds or integrate with external services for such functionality.
State Management: Kubernetes can manage stateful applications effectively through persistent volumes and stateful sets, allowing for data persistence and storage. FaaS functions are stateless by design, making them more suitable for event-driven, ephemeral tasks that do not require persistent data storage.
Cost Structure: FaaS platforms often follow a pay-as-you-go pricing model, where users are charged based on the number of function executions and resource consumption. In contrast, Kubernetes deployments may involve fixed costs for maintaining cluster infrastructure, which can vary depending on the chosen cloud provider or hosting environment.

In Summary, while FaaS offers serverless simplicity and automatic scaling, Kubernetes provides more control over resource allocation, deployment complexity, scheduled tasks, state management, and cost structure, making it a versatile choice for containerized applications.

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 Kubernetes, FaaS

Simon

Senior Fullstack Developer at QUANTUSflow Software GmbH

Apr 27, 2020

Decidedon

GitHub

GitHub Pages

Markdown

Our whole DevOps stack consists of the following tools:

@{GitHub}|tool:27| (incl. @{GitHub Pages}|tool:683|/@{Markdown}|tool:1147| for Documentation, GettingStarted and HowTo's) for collaborative review and code management tool
Respectively @{Git}|tool:1046| as revision control system
@{SourceTree}|tool:1599| as @{Git}|tool:1046| GUI
@{Visual Studio Code}|tool:4202| as IDE
@{CircleCI}|tool:190| for continuous integration (automatize development process)
@{Prettier}|tool:7035| / @{TSLint}|tool:5561| / @{ESLint}|tool:3337| as code linter
@{SonarQube}|tool:2638| as quality gate
@{Docker}|tool:586| as container management (incl. @{Docker Compose}|tool:3136| for multi-container application management)
@{VirtualBox}|tool:774| for operating system simulation tests
@{Kubernetes}|tool:1885| as cluster management for docker containers
@{Heroku}|tool:133| for deploying in test environments
@{nginx}|tool:1052| as web server (preferably used as facade server in production environment)
@{SSLMate}|tool:2752| (using @{OpenSSL}|tool:3091|) for certificate management
@{Amazon EC2}|tool:18| (incl. @{Amazon S3}|tool:25|) for deploying in stage (production-like) and production environments
@{PostgreSQL}|tool:1028| as preferred database system
@{Redis}|tool:1031| as preferred in-memory database/store (great for caching)

The main reason we have chosen Kubernetes over Docker Swarm is related to the following artifacts:

Key features: Easy and flexible installation, Clear dashboard, Great scaling operations, Monitoring is an integral part, Great load balancing concepts, Monitors the condition and ensures compensation in the event of failure.
Applications: An application can be deployed using a combination of pods, deployments, and services (or micro-services).
Functionality: Kubernetes as a complex installation and setup process, but it not as limited as Docker Swarm.
Monitoring: It supports multiple versions of logging and monitoring when the services are deployed within the cluster (Elasticsearch/Kibana (ELK), Heapster/Grafana, Sysdig cloud integration).
Scalability: All-in-one framework for distributed systems.
Other Benefits: Kubernetes is backed by the Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF), huge community among container orchestration tools, it is an open source and modular tool that works with any OS.

12.8M views12.8M

Comments

Detailed Comparison

Kubernetes	FaaS
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.	FaaS is a platform for building serverless functions on Docker Swarm Mode with first class metrics. Any UNIX process can be packaged as a function in FaaS enabling you to consume a range of web events without repetitive boiler-plate coding.
Lightweight, simple and accessible;Built for a multi-cloud world, public, private or hybrid;Highly modular, designed so that all of its components are easily swappable	-
Statistics
Stacks 61.2K	Stacks 5
Followers 52.8K	Followers 28
Votes 685	Votes 1
Pros & Cons
Pros 166 Leading docker container management solution 130 Simple and powerful 108 Open source 76 Backed by google 58 The right abstractions Cons 16 Steep learning curve 15 Poor workflow for development 8 Orchestrates only infrastructure 4 High resource requirements for on-prem clusters 2 Too heavy for simple systems	Pros 1 Simple way to build serverless applications
Integrations
Vagrant Docker Rackspace Cloud Servers Microsoft Azure Google Compute Engine Ansible Google Kubernetes Engine	Docker Docker Swarm

What are some alternatives to Kubernetes, FaaS?

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.

Docker Compose

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.

AWS Lambda

AWS Lambda is a compute service that runs your code in response to events and automatically manages the underlying compute resources for you. You can use AWS Lambda to extend other AWS services with custom logic, or create your own back-end services that operate at AWS scale, performance, and security.

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.

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.

Azure Functions

Azure Functions is an event driven, compute-on-demand experience that extends the existing Azure application platform with capabilities to implement code triggered by events occurring in virtually any Azure or 3rd party service as well as on-premises systems.

Google Cloud Run

A managed compute platform that enables you to run stateless containers that are invocable via HTTP requests. It's serverless by abstracting away all infrastructure management.

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.

Serverless

Build applications comprised of microservices that run in response to events, auto-scale for you, and only charge you when they run. This lowers the total cost of maintaining your apps, enabling you to build more logic, faster. The Framework uses new event-driven compute services, like AWS Lambda, Google CloudFunctions, and more.

Related Comparisons

FaaS vs Kubernetes: What are the differences?

Introduction

Scalability: FaaS platforms like AWS Lambda automatically scale based on incoming requests, allowing for efficient resource utilization and cost-effectiveness. On the other hand, Kubernetes provides more control over scalability as it allows users to manually scale deployments based on specific resource requirements and application demands.
Resource Allocation: FaaS abstracts infrastructure management, making it easier for developers to focus solely on code without worrying about underlying resources. In contrast, Kubernetes requires users to manage resource allocation, including CPU, memory, and storage, giving them more control over the infrastructure configuration.
Deployment Complexity: FaaS simplifies deployment by providing a serverless environment where developers can upload their functions for execution without having to manage servers. Kubernetes, while offering flexibility, requires users to set up and maintain a cluster, which can be more complex and time-consuming.
Scheduled Tasks: Kubernetes supports cron jobs for executing periodic tasks, making it suitable for applications that require scheduled operations. FaaS platforms may not have built-in support for scheduled tasks, requiring developers to implement workarounds or integrate with external services for such functionality.
State Management: Kubernetes can manage stateful applications effectively through persistent volumes and stateful sets, allowing for data persistence and storage. FaaS functions are stateless by design, making them more suitable for event-driven, ephemeral tasks that do not require persistent data storage.
Cost Structure: FaaS platforms often follow a pay-as-you-go pricing model, where users are charged based on the number of function executions and resource consumption. In contrast, Kubernetes deployments may involve fixed costs for maintaining cluster infrastructure, which can vary depending on the chosen cloud provider or hosting environment.

FaaS vs Kubernetes

Overview

FaaS vs Kubernetes: What are the differences?