Thanks to containers, deployment and application lifecycle management have taken a step forward in terms of efficiency and versatility. Like so many other solutions, however, deployment over time leads to At the moment Kubernetes is the ideal answer and the most widely followed path. Indeed, the ever-appreciated combination of open source and flexibility has made it one of the most popular solutions.
Thinking, however, to starting from scratch to build a Kubernetes infrastructure completely independently is a path few can afford. MBetter then to rely on a distribution or package that can provide additional features while limiting the resources needed for development and integration.
At the moment, there are three main paths to follow, besides the still viable one of managing everything totally autonomously: OpenShift, Tanzu e Rancher. Each with some aspects in common and distinctive traits useful for adapting to different situations and needs. Before taking action,it is therefore important to know a few details.
First of all, behind each of these options, there is a company. Probably among the major players in the open source world and experts in distributions. In each case, also with respective commercial considerations to evaluate. Open Shift is indeed a Red Hat product, Tanzu refers instead to VMware, while Rancher finally belongs to Suse.
The OpenShift ecosystem in the service of Kubernetes.
As is easy to predict, it results in characteristics that are at least in part also related to the brand they belong to. Going in order of how they have established themselves in the market, OpenShift is the first to have achieved some popularity. Taking its cue from the basic version of Kubernetes, often referred to as Vanilla, and its limitations in management tools all to be created, the Red Hat idea was the first structured support aimed at creating an ecosystem. As a result, smoother with its own software modules.
In addition, it offers a choice between completely in-house management and one instead leaning on the cloud, leveraging agreements with all major providers. This is something not to be underestimated, as it facilitates any platform transitions without additional intervention or updates in training.
It also remains a solution with an all-inclusive set of products to enable integration at all levels. Probably, among the three alternatives, the most suitable for those with these needs.
Tanzu freedom starts with virtualization
Not much different is the case with Tanzu. Indeed, it may come as no surprise how VMware has made it articularly suitable for virtualized environments. Precisely because of the spread of this technology, although brought to market sometime after Red Hat, it is rapidly gaining ground. To the point of achieving a broader and, above all, more modular offering, thanks to which it is easier to cover all one’s needs.
The ability to look to previous experience has also allowed VMware to offer more versatile management. Indeed, from the Tanzu console it remains possible to still control OpenShift modules but also any Kubernetes clusters made available by the provider.
For those also concerned about potential lock-in, surelyhe risks are less. The deployment is in fact closer to a Kubernetes Vanilla, thus with more flexibility in case of evolution or migration from one model to another.
The first step with Rancher
An operation where even those who choose Rancher should not find difficulty. As much as it may be considered the latest among the alternatives, it is certainly not to be ignored. Having entered the Suse orbit after a phase of autonomous development, it still retains ome useful traits for those unwilling to compromise with flexibility and freedom of action.
Indeed, Rancher was the first to guarantee a Management Service environment to manage Kubernetes clusters also provided by the other two alternatives. On the other hand, it still does not have the same depth of tools to complete the desired environment, but one can safely rely on third-party modules.
There is also another important aspect. The Suse distribution is best suitedfor those taking their first steps iin the Kubernetes environment. Not surprisingly, at the time VMware itself pointed to it as an ideal solution for practice.
Ultimately, the difference between the maximum autonomy of Kubernetes as Google released it and the Red Hat, VMware and Suse distributions is not so much to be sought on the functionality front as on the requirementsfront. From the rich OpenShift ecosystem to the modularity of Tanzu ideal in virtualized environments to the accessibility and flexibility of Rancher, it is primarily goals and available skills that drive the choice. Better still, if under the expert guidance of an independent software partner.