Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Fabric vs Terraform: What are the differences?
Introduction
This markdown provides a comparison between Fabric and Terraform, highlighting their key differences.
Programming Language: Fabric is implemented using Python, which allows for more flexibility and customization in creating infrastructure automation scripts. On the other hand, Terraform uses its own Domain Specific Language (DSL), called HashiCorp Configuration Language (HCL), which is more declarative and easier to read.
Cloud Provider Support: Fabric supports a wide range of cloud providers, including AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud Platform, while Terraform supports an even larger number of providers, including some less common ones, making it a more comprehensive solution for multi-cloud or hybrid cloud environments.
Ecosystem and Community: Terraform has a larger and more mature ecosystem and community compared to Fabric. Terraform has a vast collection of official and community-contributed modules, which can be reused to provision various resources, reducing the amount of custom scripting required. Fabric, although also benefiting from a community, may have fewer resources and modules available.
Maturity and Stability: Terraform is a more established and widely adopted infrastructure provisioning tool, with a longer history and larger user base. It has been battle-tested and continuously improved over the years, which contributes to its stability and reliability. Fabric, being relatively newer, may have a smaller user base, and its maturity and stability may not be on par with Terraform.
State Management: Terraform manages the state of the provisioned infrastructure using a state file, which keeps track of the current state and helps with resource management and updates. Fabric, on the other hand, does not have built-in state management. This means that state management needs to be handled separately, which may introduce additional complexity and require custom solutions.
Architecture and Extensibility: Fabric follows a modular architecture and provides a customizable framework that allows fine-grained control over infrastructure automation. It provides a set of primitives that can be used to build flexible and complex automation workflows. Conversely, Terraform is designed to be more opinionated and follows a declarative approach, abstracting away lower-level details. While this makes Terraform easier to use for general infrastructure automation, it may limit the extensibility and customization options compared to Fabric.
In summary, Fabric and Terraform differ in their programming language, cloud provider support, ecosystem and community, maturity and stability, state management, and architecture/extensibility.
Ok, so first - AWS Copilot is CloudFormation under the hood, but the way it works results in you not thinking about CFN anymore. AWS found the right balance with Copilot - it's insanely simple to setup production-ready multi-account environment with many services inside, with CI/CD out of the box etc etc. It's pretty new, but even now it was enough to launch Transcripto, which uses may be a dozen of different AWS services, all bound together by Copilot.
Because Pulumi uses real programming languages, you can actually write abstractions for your infrastructure code, which is incredibly empowering. You still 'describe' your desired state, but by having a programming language at your fingers, you can factor out patterns, and package it up for easier consumption.
We use Terraform to manage AWS cloud environment for the project. It is pretty complex, largely static, security-focused, and constantly evolving.
Terraform provides descriptive (declarative) way of defining the target configuration, where it can work out the dependencies between configuration elements and apply differences without re-provisioning the entire cloud stack.
AdvantagesTerraform is vendor-neutral in a way that it is using a common configuration language (HCL) with plugins (providers) for multiple cloud and service providers.
Terraform keeps track of the previous state of the deployment and applies incremental changes, resulting in faster deployment times.
Terraform allows us to share reusable modules between projects. We have built an impressive library of modules internally, which makes it very easy to assemble a new project from pre-fabricated building blocks.
DisadvantagesSoftware is imperfect, and Terraform is no exception. Occasionally we hit annoying bugs that we have to work around. The interaction with any underlying APIs is encapsulated inside 3rd party Terraform providers, and any bug fixes or new features require a provider release. Some providers have very poor coverage of the underlying APIs.
Terraform is not great for managing highly dynamic parts of cloud environments. That part is better delegated to other tools or scripts.
Terraform state may go out of sync with the target environment or with the source configuration, which often results in painful reconciliation.
I personally am not a huge fan of vendor lock in for multiple reasons:
- I've seen cost saving moves to the cloud end up costing a fortune and trapping companies due to over utilization of cloud specific features.
- I've seen S3 failures nearly take down half the internet.
- I've seen companies get stuck in the cloud because they aren't built cloud agnostic.
I choose to use terraform for my cloud provisioning for these reasons:
- It's cloud agnostic so I can use it no matter where I am.
- It isn't difficult to use and uses a relatively easy to read language.
- It tests infrastructure before running it, and enables me to see and keep changes up to date.
- It runs from the same CLI I do most of my CM work from.
Context: I wanted to create an end to end IoT data pipeline simulation in Google Cloud IoT Core and other GCP services. I never touched Terraform meaningfully until working on this project, and it's one of the best explorations in my development career. The documentation and syntax is incredibly human-readable and friendly. I'm used to building infrastructure through the google apis via Python , but I'm so glad past Sung did not make that decision. I was tempted to use Google Cloud Deployment Manager, but the templates were a bit convoluted by first impression. I'm glad past Sung did not make this decision either.
Solution: Leveraging Google Cloud Build Google Cloud Run Google Cloud Bigtable Google BigQuery Google Cloud Storage Google Compute Engine along with some other fun tools, I can deploy over 40 GCP resources using Terraform!
Check Out My Architecture: CLICK ME
Check out the GitHub repo attached
Pros of Fabric
- Python23
- Simple21
- Low learning curve, from bash script to Python power5
- Installation feedback for Twitter App Cards5
- Easy on maintainance3
- Single config file3
- Installation? pip install fabric... Boom3
- Easy to add any type of job3
- Agentless3
- Easily automate any set system automation2
- Flexible1
- Crash Analytics1
- Backward compatibility1
- Remote sudo execution1
Pros of Terraform
- Infrastructure as code121
- Declarative syntax73
- Planning45
- Simple28
- Parallelism24
- Well-documented8
- Cloud agnostic8
- It's like coding your infrastructure in simple English6
- Immutable infrastructure6
- Platform agnostic5
- Extendable4
- Automation4
- Automates infrastructure deployments4
- Portability4
- Lightweight2
- Scales to hundreds of hosts2
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Fabric
Cons of Terraform
- Doesn't have full support to GKE1