Go.CD vs Rancher: What are the differences?
Go.CD: Open source continuous delivery tool allows for advanced workflow modeling and dependencies management. GoCD is an open source continuous delivery server created by ThoughtWorks. GoCD offers business a first-class build and deployment engine for complete control and visibility; Rancher: Open Source Platform for Running a Private Container Service. 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.
Go.CD and Rancher are primarily classified as "Continuous Integration" and "Container" tools respectively.
Some of the features offered by Go.CD are:
- Model complex workflows with dependency management and parallel execution
- Easy to pass once-built binaries between stages
- Visibility into your end-to-end workflow. Track a change from commit to deploy at a glance
On the other hand, Rancher provides the following key features:
- Manage Hosts, Deploy Containers, Monitor Resources
- User Management & Collaboration
- Native Docker APIs & Tools
"Open source" is the top reason why over 29 developers like Go.CD, while over 89 developers mention "Easy to use" as the leading cause for choosing Rancher.
Go.CD and Rancher are both open source tools. It seems that Rancher with 11.9K GitHub stars and 1.34K forks on GitHub has more adoption than Go.CD with 5.02K GitHub stars and 791 GitHub forks.
According to the StackShare community, Rancher has a broader approval, being mentioned in 89 company stacks & 35 developers stacks; compared to Go.CD, which is listed in 28 company stacks and 8 developer stacks.
What is GoCD?
What is Rancher?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Sign up to add, upvote and see more prosMake informed product decisions
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
- Consume too much unnecessary resource by just running rancher agent alone;
- Hard to recover from system failure
- Bad performance of load balancing (compare to dokcer swarm built-in LB or others).
The whole infrastructure is managed through Rancher. It provides a simple interface to all the underlying tools - Docker, HAProxy (automatically configures load balancer from the containers).
Currently looking to move to Swarm or Kubernetes due to a few issues I have with Rancher.
We use Rancher for container orchestration and automated deployment pipelines.