Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Envoyer vs Istio: What are the differences?
1. Deployment Management: Envoyer focuses on easily deploying and managing applications, simplifying the deployment process with a user-friendly interface. On the other hand, Istio is a service mesh that enhances the communication between microservices, focusing more on traffic management, security, and observability.
Monitoring and Observability: Envoyer provides basic monitoring capabilities to track deployments and server performance but does not offer advanced observability features. In contrast, Istio includes robust monitoring and observability tools, allowing users to gain insights into traffic flow, latency, errors, and other metrics within the service mesh.
Load Balancing: Envoyer does not provide native load balancing features and relies on the underlying infrastructure for load distribution. Istio, however, offers sophisticated load balancing functionalities, enabling traffic shifting, fault tolerance, and circuit breaking within the service mesh.
Traffic Management: Istio allows for advanced traffic management capabilities such as A/B testing, canary deployments, and blue-green deployments, providing granular control over traffic routing and version switching. Envoyer, on the other hand, focuses more on simplifying deployment workflows and does not offer the same level of traffic management features.
Security: Istio enhances security in microservices architecture by providing features like mutual TLS authentication, access control, and encryption of communication between services. Envoyer, while offering basic security measures, does not provide the comprehensive security features present in Istio's service mesh.
Scalability and Extensibility: Istio is highly scalable and extensible, allowing users to integrate additional functionalities and customize policies through its open-source ecosystem. Envoyer, while suitable for deployment management, may not provide the same level of scalability and extensibility as Istio for complex microservices architectures.
In Summary, Envoyer simplifies deployment management, while Istio focuses on traffic management, monitoring, load balancing, security, scalability, and extensibility within a service mesh architecture.
Istio based on powerful Envoy whereas Kong based on Nginx. Istio is K8S native as well it's actively developed when k8s was successfully accepted with production-ready apps whereas Kong slowly migrated to start leveraging K8s. Istio has an inbuilt turn-keyIstio based on powerful Envoy whereas Kong based on Nginx. Istio is K8S native as well it's actively developed when k8s was successfully accepted with production-ready apps whereas Kong slowly migrated to start leveraging K8s. Istio has an inbuilt turn key solution with Rancher whereas Kong completely lacks here. Traffic distribution in Istio can be done via canary, a/b, shadowing, HTTP headers, ACL, whitelist whereas in Kong it's limited to canary, ACL, blue-green, proxy caching. Istio has amazing community support which is visible via Github stars or releases when comparing both.
Pros of Envoyer
- Easy to use3
Pros of Istio
- Zero code for logging and monitoring14
- Service Mesh9
- Great flexibility8
- Resiliency5
- Powerful authorization mechanisms5
- Ingress controller5
- Easy integration with Kubernetes and Docker4
- Full Security4
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Envoyer
Cons of Istio
- Performance17