Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Jenkins vs Sauce Labs: What are the differences?
Introduction
Jenkins and Sauce Labs are both popular tools used in the software development process, but they have several key differences.
1. Compatibility: Jenkins is a self-hosted automation tool that can be installed on any server or operating system, while Sauce Labs is a cloud-based automation platform that requires an internet connection to access.
2. Scalability: Jenkins is a highly scalable tool that can handle a large number of builds and tests simultaneously. On the other hand, Sauce Labs offers a distributed testing infrastructure that allows for parallel execution of tests on a large scale, making it more suitable for testing in a highly demanding environment.
3. Maintenance: With Jenkins, the responsibility of maintaining the infrastructure, including hardware and software, lies with the user or organization. In contrast, Sauce Labs takes care of all the maintenance tasks, including software updates and infrastructure management, leaving the users free to focus on their testing activities.
4. Browser and Platform Support: Jenkins supports a wide range of browsers and platforms, but it requires manual configuration and setup for each environment. Sauce Labs, on the other hand, provides a comprehensive set of browser and platform configurations out of the box, simplifying the testing process and reducing setup time.
5. Cloud-based services: While Jenkins is primarily focused on providing automation and continuous integration capabilities, Sauce Labs offers additional cloud-based services such as real-time monitoring, log analysis, and advanced reporting, providing developers with a more comprehensive testing and debugging solution.
6. Cost: Jenkins is an open-source tool, making it free to use. However, the costs associated with infrastructure, maintenance, and support can add up. Sauce Labs, being a cloud-based service, offers various pricing plans depending on the usage, making it a more cost-effective option for organizations with smaller testing needs.
In Summary, Jenkins and Sauce Labs differ in terms of compatibility, scalability, maintenance, browser and platform support, additional cloud-based services, and cost. Jenkins is a self-hosted tool that requires manual maintenance and setup, while Sauce Labs is a cloud-based platform with automated infrastructure management.
I am looking to purchase one of these tools for Mobile testing for my team. It should support Native, hybrid, and responsive app testing. It should also feature debugging, parallel execution, automation testing/easy integration with automation testing tools like Selenium, and the capability to provide availability of devices specifically for us to use at any time with good speed of performing all these activities.
I have already used Perfecto mobile, and Sauce Labs in my other projects before. I want to know how different or better is AWS Device farm in usage and how advantageous it would be for us to use it over other mentioned tools
A SaaS offering like Sauce Labs (or BrowserStack or LambdaTest, etc) will provide a remote Selenium/Appium Grid including the ability to run test automation in parallel (up to the amount based your subscription level) an a wide array of browsers and mobile devices.
These tools can be expensive, but if you can afford them, the expertise and effort of maintaining the grid, browser updates, etc. is worth it.
AWS Device Farm can be significantly cheaper, but is much more work to setup and run. It will not give you as many devices, or the reporting and screen/video capture you get with the the services. And there is no support for AWS Device Farm, and very poor documentation. I have used it, but do not recommend it. Running your own grid and physical device lab is better, but I'd stick with a service like Sauce Labs or Perfecto which will save you time and give you better services despite the higher price tag.
Stability - Just works. Availability - More than 15 datacenters. Enterprise features like SSO, local testing and SOC2/GDPR compliant.
BitBar's Dedicated Devices would be a great option for you. It allows you to dedicate (reserve) devices for your use only which also having access to all of the devices in the shared cloud. BitBar has the features and integrations that you are looking for as well.
We are currently using Azure Pipelines for continous integration. Our applications are developed witn .NET framework. But when we look at the online Jenkins is the most widely used tool for continous integration. Can you please give me the advice which one is best to use for my case Azure pipeline or jenkins.
If your source code is on GitHub, also take a look at Github actions. https://github.com/features/actions
I'm open to anything. just want something that break less and doesn't need me to pay for it, and can be hosted on Docker. our scripting language is powershell core. so it's better to support it. also we are building dotnet core in our pipeline, so if they have anything related that helps with the CI would be nice.
Google cloud build can help you. It is hosted on cloud and also provide reasonable free quota.
I'm planning to setup complete CD-CD setup for spark and python application which we are going to deploy in aws lambda and EMR Cluster. Which tool would be best one to choose. Since my company is trying to adopt to concourse i would like to understand what are the lack of capabilities concourse have . Thanks in advance !
I would definetly recommend Concourse to you, as it is one of the most advanced modern methods of making CI/CD while Jenkins is an old monolithic dinosaur. Concourse itself is cloudnative and containerbased which helps you to build simple, high-performance and scalable CI/CD pipelines. In my opinion, the only lack of skills you have with Concourse is your own knowledge of how to build pipelines and automate things. Technincally there is no lack, i would even say you can extend it way more easily. But as a Con it is more easy to interact with Jenkins if you are only used to UIs. Concourse needs someone which is capable of using CLIs.
From a StackShare Community member: "Currently we use Travis CI and have optimized it as much as we can so our builds are fairly quick. Our boss is all about redundancy so we are looking for another solution to fall back on in case Travis goes down and/or jacks prices way up (they were recently acquired). Could someone recommend which CI we should go with and if they have time, an explanation of how they're different?"
We use CircleCI because of the better value it provides in its plans. I'm sure we could have used Travis just as easily but we found CircleCI's pricing to be more reasonable. In the two years since we signed up, the service has improved. CircleCI is always innovating and iterating on their platform. We have been very satisfied.
As the maintainer of the Karate DSL open-source project - I found Travis CI very easy to integrate into the GitHub workflow and it has been steady sailing for more than 2 years now ! It works well for Java / Apache Maven projects and we were able to configure it to use the latest Oracle JDK as per our needs. Thanks to the Travis CI team for this service to the open-source community !
I use Google Cloud Build because it's my first foray into the CICD world(loving it so far), and I wanted to work with something GCP native to avoid giving permissions to other SaaS tools like CircleCI and Travis CI.
I really like it because it's free for the first 120 minutes, and it's one of the few CICD tools that enterprises are open to using since it's contained within GCP.
One of the unique things is that it has the Kaniko cache, which speeds up builds by creating intermediate layers within the docker image vs. pushing the full thing from the start. Helpful when you're installing just a few additional dependencies.
Feel free to checkout an example: Cloudbuild Example
I use Travis CI because of various reasons - 1. Cloud based system so no dedicated server required, and you do not need to administrate it. 2. Easy YAML configuration. 3. Supports Major Programming Languages. 4. Support of build matrix 6. Supports AWS, Azure, Docker, Heroku, Google Cloud, Github Pages, PyPi and lot more. 7. Slack Notifications.
You are probably looking at another hosted solution: Jenkins is a good tool but it way too work intensive to be used as just a backup solution.
I have good experience with Circle-CI, Codeship, Drone.io and Travis (as well as problematic experiences with all of them), but my go-to tool is Gitlab CI: simple, powerful and if you have problems with their limitations or pricing, you can always install runners somewhere and use Gitlab just for scheduling and management. Even if you don't host your git repository at Gitlab, you can have Gitlab pull changes automatically from wherever you repo lives.
If you are considering Jenkins I would recommend at least checking out Buildkite. The agents are self-hosted (like Jenkins) but the interface is hosted for you. It meshes up some of the things I like about hosted services (pipeline definitions in YAML, managed interface and authentication) with things I like about Jenkins (local customizable agent images, secrets only on own instances, custom agent level scripts, sizing instances to your needs).
Within our deployment pipeline, we have a need to deploy to multiple customer environments, and manage secrets specifically in a way that integrates well with AWS, Kubernetes Secrets, Terraform and our pipelines ourselves.
Jenkins offered us the ability to choose one of a number of credentials/secrets management approaches, and models secrets as a more dynamic concept that GitHub Actions provided.
Additionally, we are operating Jenkins within our development Kubernetes cluster as a kind of system-wide orchestrator, allowing us to use Kubernetes pods as build agents, avoiding the ongoing direct costs associated with GitHub Actions minutes / per-user pricing. Obviously as a consequence we take on the indirect costs of maintain Jenkins itself, patching it, upgrading etc. However our experience with managing Jenkins via Kubernetes and declarative Jenkins configuration has led us to believe that this cost is small, particularly as the majority of actual building and testing is handled inside docker containers and Kubernetes, alleviating the need for less supported plugins that may make Jenkins administration more difficult.
Jenkins is a pretty flexible, complete tool. Especially I love the possibility to configure jobs as a code with Jenkins pipelines.
CircleCI is well suited for small projects where the main task is to run continuous integration as quickly as possible. Travis CI is recommended primarily for open-source projects that need to be tested in different environments.
And for something a bit larger I prefer to use Jenkins because it is possible to make serious system configuration thereby different plugins. In Jenkins, I can change almost anything. But if you want to start the CI chain as soon as possible, Jenkins may not be the right choice.
Pros of Jenkins
- Hosted internally523
- Free open source469
- Great to build, deploy or launch anything async318
- Tons of integrations243
- Rich set of plugins with good documentation211
- Has support for build pipelines111
- Easy setup68
- It is open-source66
- Workflow plugin53
- Configuration as code13
- Very powerful tool12
- Many Plugins11
- Continuous Integration10
- Great flexibility10
- Git and Maven integration is better9
- 100% free and open source8
- Github integration7
- Slack Integration (plugin)7
- Easy customisation6
- Self-hosted GitLab Integration (plugin)6
- Docker support5
- Pipeline API5
- Fast builds4
- Platform idnependency4
- Hosted Externally4
- Excellent docker integration4
- It`w worked3
- Customizable3
- Can be run as a Docker container3
- It's Everywhere3
- JOBDSL3
- AWS Integration3
- Easily extendable with seamless integration2
- PHP Support2
- Build PR Branch Only2
- NodeJS Support2
- Ruby/Rails Support2
- Universal controller2
- Loose Coupling2
Pros of Sauce Labs
- Selenium-compatible60
- Webdriver compatible46
- Video recordings of every test35
- Qa31
- Mobile support29
- Any programming language26
- Developer tools23
- Test local and firewalled servers21
- Jenkins integration20
- Pristine VMs18
- CI Compatible17
- Appium support11
- Parallel testing9
- Rapid environment preparation8
- Mobile device support8
- Easy testing on almost any device7
- Allows me to Focus more test automation rather than IT7
- Secure testing and easy setup6
- Easy setup with CI and fast automated tests5
- Quick support response5
- Fast and reliable to host the automated tests4
- Easy to setup and understand,4
- Easy setup and integration with Travis Ci3
- Maintained browser matrix3
- Easy onboarding, do not need to manager VMs/OS/Browsers3
- Efficient tool to verify product quality2
- Teamcity Integration and mobile testing win2
- Hany for platform testing2
- Great documentation2
- Generous free trial2
- Easy. Straightforward. Scalable2
- Great way to integrate test suite on cloud2
- Simplicity of Sauce-connect2
- Very Good, Quick, flexible Infrastructure Support1
- It's great for my QA work1
- Awesome tech support1
- Having this available for CI servers is fantastic1
- Amazing service to do cloud cross browser testing1
- Depth of integrations1
- Because of its cloud based support for appium1
- Easy setup, Works great with selenium.1
- QE support1
- Manuals are not very well versed for beginners1
- Secure testing1
- Cheaper than browserstack1
- Stable1
- Simple to set up and integrate so many browser configs0
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Jenkins
- Workarounds needed for basic requirements13
- Groovy with cumbersome syntax10
- Plugins compatibility issues8
- Lack of support7
- Limited abilities with declarative pipelines7
- No YAML syntax5
- Too tied to plugins versions4
Cons of Sauce Labs
- Relatively slow2
- Expensive2