Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Apache Mesos vs Kubernetes: What are the differences?
Introduction
In this article, we will explore and compare the key differences between Apache Mesos and Kubernetes, two popular orchestration platforms used for managing and scheduling containers in a cluster environment.
Architecture: Apache Mesos follows a master-slave architecture, where the cluster consists of one or more masters that manage resources and multiple slave nodes responsible for running tasks. On the other hand, Kubernetes follows a master-worker architecture, where the master controls the cluster state and the worker nodes execute tasks.
Resource Allocation: Mesos uses fine-grained resource allocation, allowing tasks to be allocated CPU and memory resources based on specific requirements. Kubernetes, on the other hand, uses a coarser-grained approach, allocating resources based on predefined resource limits and requests.
Scalability: Mesos was designed to scale up to tens of thousands of nodes, making it suitable for large-scale deployments. Kubernetes, although capable of scaling to a significant number of nodes, is known to be more efficient in managing clusters with hundreds or thousands of nodes.
Service Discovery: Kubernetes provides built-in service discovery and load balancing mechanisms through its DNS-based service discovery and Ingress features. Mesos, on the other hand, relies on external frameworks like Marathon or Chronos for these capabilities.
Networking Models: Kubernetes supports multiple networking models, including overlay networks and host networking. Mesos provides more flexibility in terms of networking choices, allowing users to choose between different networking models like virtual network interfaces or Linux bridges.
Community Support: Kubernetes boasts a larger and more active community compared to Mesos, with a wider range of plugins, tools, and resources available. This strong community support makes it easier for users to find help, contribute to the project, and adopt Kubernetes in various environments.
In Summary, Apache Mesos and Kubernetes differ in their architecture, resource allocation approaches, scalability, service discovery mechanisms, networking models, and community support. These differences enable users to choose the platform that best suits their requirements and infrastructure.
The problem I have is I want to choose a Private PaaS to install it on my own infra and provide a platform as a service to my own clients. I need something like OpenShift or Jelastic...
The most important factors for me are that it has to be on-premise support, extensible (we can add feature to it), supports containers (docker, lxc, ...) supports databases (MySQL, Redis, mongo...), support load balancers, support software-defined storages (ceph, minio,...) monitoring and we can sell it to our own clients.
Do you have any idea?
Mesos-Enthuasiast may criticise me for my statement, but Kubernetes has simply won the race. Most companies I work with have a Kubernetes strategy. With that backing the platform will continue to grow whereas Mesos will become a niche.
In your position I'd start by talking to customers and understanding their requirements. Unfortunately, although Apache Mesos + Marathon is generally liked more and simpler, it's still a commercially owned space when you run into trouble. On the other hand Kubernetes is more open and popular (check search results, about 10X) and customers like that they can move around among GKE and AWS and other Kubernetes environments. So although I think Kubernetes is overly complex for the newcomer, (and you may need Helm as well) it's going to be more popular with your customers. Also, Kubernetes is fairly open in terms of extensibility (esp if you work in Go lang).
From a developer perspective, any new project we will be working on, unless specifically requested by the client, will be on top of Kubernetes. Actually, Kubernetes compete with Marathon as a container orchestration software, and as far as I know, one could run Kubernetes over Mesos. So, assuming your PaaS will serve developers, I would take a closer look at Kubernetes first. The goal for Mesos project is to be a sort of kernel for distributed computing, while Kubernetes is to manage the deploy and load balacing o of containers. Either way, you will need a container orchestration solution and the one to go with, given the current tendency in the market and the ecosystem around it, is Kubernetes.
We develop rapidly with docker-compose orchestrated services, however, for production - we utilise the very best ideas that Kubernetes has to offer: SCALE! We can scale when needed, setting a maximum and minimum level of nodes for each application layer - scaling only when the load balancer needs it. This allowed us to reduce our devops costs by 40% whilst also maintaining an SLA of 99.87%.
Our whole DevOps stack consists of the following tools:
- GitHub (incl. GitHub Pages/Markdown for Documentation, GettingStarted and HowTo's) for collaborative review and code management tool
- Respectively Git as revision control system
- SourceTree as Git GUI
- Visual Studio Code as IDE
- CircleCI for continuous integration (automatize development process)
- Prettier / TSLint / ESLint as code linter
- SonarQube as quality gate
- Docker as container management (incl. Docker Compose for multi-container application management)
- VirtualBox for operating system simulation tests
- Kubernetes as cluster management for docker containers
- Heroku for deploying in test environments
- nginx as web server (preferably used as facade server in production environment)
- SSLMate (using OpenSSL) for certificate management
- Amazon EC2 (incl. Amazon S3) for deploying in stage (production-like) and production environments
- PostgreSQL as preferred database system
- Redis 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.
Pros of Kubernetes
- Leading docker container management solution166
- Simple and powerful129
- Open source107
- Backed by google76
- The right abstractions58
- Scale services25
- Replication controller20
- Permission managment11
- Supports autoscaling9
- Simple8
- Cheap8
- Self-healing6
- Open, powerful, stable5
- Reliable5
- No cloud platform lock-in5
- Promotes modern/good infrascture practice5
- Scalable4
- Quick cloud setup4
- Custom and extensibility3
- Captain of Container Ship3
- Cloud Agnostic3
- Backed by Red Hat3
- Runs on azure3
- A self healing environment with rich metadata3
- Everything of CaaS2
- Gke2
- Golang2
- Easy setup2
- Expandable2
- Sfg2
Pros of Apache Mesos
- Easy scaling21
- Web UI6
- Fault-Tolerant2
- Elastic Distributed System1
- High-Available1
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Kubernetes
- Steep learning curve16
- Poor workflow for development15
- Orchestrates only infrastructure8
- High resource requirements for on-prem clusters4
- Too heavy for simple systems2
- Additional vendor lock-in (Docker)1
- More moving parts to secure1
- Additional Technology Overhead1
Cons of Apache Mesos
- Not for long term1
- Depends on Zookeeper1