OpenShift vs Kubernetes: Choosing the Right Container Platform

Choosing the right container platform can be a daunting task, especially with so many options available. OpenShift and Kubernetes are two of the most popular choices, but they have some key differences.

OpenShift is a managed platform that offers a more comprehensive solution for container orchestration, including automated deployment, scaling, and monitoring.

Kubernetes, on the other hand, is an open-source container orchestration system that provides a lot of flexibility and customization options. It's often used as a base for other platforms, including OpenShift.

In terms of scalability, OpenShift is designed to handle large-scale deployments with ease, while Kubernetes requires more manual configuration and management.

OpenShift is a cloud development Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS) developed by open-source provider Red Hat, and it's built on top of Kubernetes.

Kubernetes is an open-source Container-as-a-Service (CaaS) framework initially created by Google, and it's an open-source, portable containerization system.

Kubernetes is used by developers to automate the deployment, scaling, management, and networking of containers, and it groups the containers into logical clusters for easy discovery and management.

Kubernetes is capable of running in both cloud and on-premise systems, as well as hybrid clouds, which gives developers flexibility and freedom of choice when selecting infrastructure.

OpenShift, on the other hand, is a distribution of Kubernetes, and it's designed to make it easier for developers to deploy and manage containerized applications.

Kubernetes has some drawbacks, including its inherent complexity, which makes observability difficult, especially when used across highly distributed systems.

OpenShift, however, offers some advantages, including manual scaling of containerized applications and support for various programming languages, such as Node.js, Python, and Java.

Kubernetes has some amazing features that make it a powerful tool for managing applications. It manages batches and CI workloads, allowing users to automatically or manually scale their applications.

One of the most impressive features of Kubernetes is its self-recovery functionality. It can restart failed containers, replace and remove containers that fail health checks, making it a reliable choice for application management.

Kubernetes also takes care of service discovery and load-balancing, assigning DNS names, IP addresses, and load-balancing to pods automatically. This saves developers a lot of time and effort, allowing them to focus on other important tasks.

OpenShift, on the other hand, has its own set of features that make it a great choice for application management. Kubernetes' operators help manage applications efficiently, allowing code to interact with the Kubernetes system.

OpenShift also offers cluster installation and upgrades, making it a convenient choice for developers. The Knative feature in OpenShift helps create Faas (Function-as-a-Service) workloads, giving developers more flexibility in their application development.

Here's a comparison of the key features of Kubernetes and OpenShift:

Kubernetes and OpenShift share some key features that make them powerful tools for application management.

Kubernetes manages batches and CI workloads, allowing users to scale applications automatically or manually. It also has self-recovery functionality, restarting failed containers and replacing or removing containers that fail health checks.

In Kubernetes, service discovery and load-balancing services assign DNS names, IP addresses, and load-balance to pods automatically. This makes it easier to manage complex applications.

OpenShift's Kubernetes operators make application management more efficient by allowing code to interact with the Kubernetes system. This is a significant improvement over manual management.

OpenShift also offers cluster installation and upgrades as a key feature. This makes it easier to deploy and manage applications across multiple environments.

Here's a comparison of some key features of Kubernetes and OpenShift:

Kubernetes and OpenShift are both powerful container orchestration platforms, but their architectures are designed to work together seamlessly.

A Kubernetes cluster requires at least one worker node, which is a collection of worker machines that make up the nodes where our container will be deployed.

The control plane in Kubernetes oversees the worker nodes and any pods contained within them.

There are two main categories of components in a Kubernetes cluster: nodes and control plane.

Here are the main components of a Kubernetes cluster:

Container orchestration software automates the administration of containerized workloads and services, greatly reducing the time IT staff spend keeping an application environment running smoothly. This allows organizations to digitally transform at a rapid clip without getting bogged down by slow development, scaling issues, and high costs.

Container orchestration is a key component of containerization architecture, providing faster deployment and scalability and working uniformly across development and staging phases. Containers are standalone software packages that include libraries, tools, settings, and runtime to make applications work.

OpenShift and Kubernetes are two of the most widely used container orchestration tools, with OpenShift offering a secure-by-default option and stricter security policies than Kubernetes.

Container orchestration software automates the administration of containerized workloads and services, greatly reducing the time IT staff spend keeping an application environment running smoothly.

It's a game-changer for organizations looking to digitally transform at a rapid clip without getting bogged down by slow development, scaling issues, and high costs associated with optimizing application infrastructure.

Container orchestration tools like Kubernetes and OpenShift are two of the most widely used, and they share many features in common. However, there are critical differences between them.

Kubernetes is a strong option if you need more customization and flexibility, and you have in-house Kubernetes experts who can troubleshoot problems as they arise.

OpenShift, on the other hand, is designed to meet the needs of industries with strong compliance and regulatory requirements, such as healthcare or finance.

If your organization needs a container orchestration solution with enterprise-level support and security, OpenShift is the clear choice, offering a secure-by-default option and stricter security policies than Kubernetes.

Kubernetes, however, works on the widest possible range of operating systems and platforms, making it a better fit for companies that prioritize rapid updates and releases.

Dynatrace combines metrics, logs, and traces with topology information, real user experience data, and meta information to provide automatic and intelligent observability for OpenShift and Kubernetes.

This advanced observability allows you to pinpoint and solve performance problems as they arise, making it easier to manage your container orchestration solution.

Dynatrace uses AIOps to identify and prioritize alerts from applications and infrastructure without changing code, container images, or deployments.

The Dynatrace observability and security platform is the only Kubernetes monitoring system with continuous automation that identifies and prioritizes alerts.

With Dynatrace, you can quickly release better software faster by automating your operations and managing costs with powerful monitoring capabilities for OpenShift.

OpenShift uses Jenkins, an automation server that provides source-to-image support and can be used as a CI server. This allows for seamless integration and automation of the build and deployment process.

CI, or Continuous Integration, is a DevOps best practice that ensures code changes don't break the application. This is achieved by running automated tests to check for integration challenges.

Kubernetes also relies on a third-party tool called CircleCI to build a CI/CD flow. This shows that Kubernetes and OpenShift both prioritize automation and integration.

After the build stage, all code changes are deployed to the testing and/or production environment. This is the CD, or Continuous Delivery, part of the process.

Tight integration with source code management tools like Gitlab, Github, and Bitbucket is also supported by OpenShift. This means developers can work with their preferred tools and still enjoy the benefits of OpenShift.

Load Balancing is a crucial aspect of Container Orchestration. It's a process that helps distribute network traffic across multiple servers to improve responsiveness, reliability, and scalability.

In Kubernetes, load balancing is a cloud-specific component, and you'll need to wire up an AWS load balancer if you're using EKS. This is a key difference from other container orchestration platforms like OpenShift.

OpenShift has a built-in HA proxy component that handles routing and load balancing, making it a mature solution. Routers have been around for much longer than Ingress in Kubernetes.

Ingress is an interface that's supported by multiple servers, including HAProxy, Nginx, Kong, Google Cloud, and AWS implementations. This gives you more flexibility and options when choosing a load balancing solution.

Ultimately, the choice between Routers and Ingress comes down to your specific needs and expectations.

In a container orchestration setup, nodes play a crucial role. The master node, also known as the control plane, manages all the worker nodes in the cluster.

The master node is responsible for managing the entire cluster, ensuring that the worker nodes are running smoothly and that the applications are being deployed correctly.

A worker node is where the containers of the application will run. This is where the actual workload happens, and the master node oversees the process.

Here's a breakdown of the different types of nodes:

In container orchestration, understanding the difference between OpenShift projects and Kubernetes namespaces is crucial. OpenShift projects provide a more user-friendly experience, automatically making the creator the project admin.

One key feature of OpenShift projects is that they have stricter validation than namespaces, limiting the types of annotations that can be applied. This ensures that projects are created with a specific set of predefined keys.

OpenShift projects also offer more features for multi-tenancy, such as indirect creation and cluster admin control. For example, a cluster admin can inject a template for project creation, allowing for a standardized setup across the cluster.

Here are some key differences between OpenShift projects and Kubernetes namespaces:

Kubernetes is an open-source container orchestration tool with a wide range of community adoption. It integrates well with CI/CD applications and can scale applications dynamically based on incoming traffic.

One of the key differences between OpenShift and Kubernetes is that OpenShift is an enterprise edition with Kubernetes underneath, providing additional enterprise features and support.

Kubernetes is used for deploying applications, whereas OpenShift is used for containerizing applications with the help of Kubernetes underneath. This helps applications run more efficiently.

OpenShift provides enterprise features and support, which may be beneficial for large-scale deployments.

OpenShift and Kubernetes are both powerful container orchestration platforms, but they have some key differences.

Kubernetes is an open source project managed by the Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF), while OpenShift is an open source Red Hat offering built on top of Kubernetes.

OpenShift provides a simplified, user-friendly interface with built-in support for CI/CD pipelines, making it easier to manage and deploy applications. Its ease of use is a major advantage over Kubernetes.

OpenShift has several built-in security features, including running containers as a non-root user by default and providing additional security policies out of the box.

Here are the key differences between OpenShift and Kubernetes:

OpenShift's built-in security features and advanced SDN solution make it a more secure and scalable choice for enterprise-grade container platforms.

OpenShift's pricing model includes additional features, support, and services, which may be a consideration for organizations looking for a more comprehensive solution.

Kubernetes, on the other hand, is a more flexible and powerful platform that offers increased flexibility and powerful features, but can be complex to set up and manage.

OpenShift has strict security policies from the start, requiring a minimum of user privileges for even basic operations. This makes it more restrictive than Kubernetes, which lacks native authentication and authorization capabilities.

Kubernetes security features require a more complex setup, making it more susceptible to attacks. In contrast, OpenShift offers default encryption within a cluster, giving it a clear edge in security.

OpenShift support comes in four different forms: community version (OKD), OpenShift container platform, OpenShift online, and DIY flavors like community editions. Kubernetes support also varies, with devops agencies and hosted Kubernetes versions available.

Here's a comparison of OpenShift and Kubernetes support options:

OpenShift's centralized OAuth implementation provides specific support for LDAP and Active Directory integrations, giving it a clear edge in authentication and authorization. This makes it easier to manage permissions and access control in production systems.

OpenShift has strict security policies right from the start, requiring a minimum of user privileges for even basic operations and limiting Docker Containers to run as simple images.

Kubernetes security features require a more complex setup, lacking native authentication and authorization capabilities, and relying on third-party tools for that purpose.

OpenShift's security protocol is defined right out of the box, with default encryption within a cluster, making it more secure than Kubernetes.

OpenShift has fine-grained access control baked in from the start, with security policies already defined and done-for-you, making it easier to manage users and access.

Kubernetes has RBAC features, but it can be hard to tweak the dials and get the right security setup for your cluster, often starting with a non-production setup.

OpenShift offers strict security policies and is more restrictive than Kubernetes, not allowing running containers as root by default, which is why many official images on DockerHub are not allowed.

Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) is enforced as part of OpenShift's security approach, making permissions vital, especially in production systems.

OpenShift shines in authentication, with specific support for LDAP and Active Directory integrations, and also supports authentication and authorization for external applications through a centralized OAuth implementation.

Support is a crucial aspect of any technology, and both OpenShift and Kubernetes have their own approaches to ensuring you get the help you need.

OpenShift offers dedicated customer service, support, and guidance, which is a big plus for developers who need assistance. This means you can get help 24/7 from a team of Red Hat engineers.

Kubernetes, on the other hand, is an open-source project that relies on community support. If you encounter any issues, you'll need to rely on the experience of other developers in forums and wait for your questions to be answered.

Both OpenShift and Kubernetes have community editions that you can choose to evaluate and stick to, if you prefer a DIY approach.

OpenShift support comes in four different forms:

You can also opt for hosted Kubernetes versions that support at the cluster level, but not further up the stack, like connecting with your SCM system.

Logging and monitoring are crucial for any OpenShift setup. OpenShift ships with a built-in ELK stack, which you can choose to install or not.

You can configure the ELK stack to consume application logs as well. This is a great way to keep track of what's happening in your applications.

For Kubernetes, setting up logging and monitoring can be a bit more DIY. But it's still possible to get it working.

Prometheus is a great option for monitoring cluster and node level metrics. I've used it in the past and it's been a game-changer.

It's even possible to do application level monitoring in OpenShift, which can give you a more detailed view of what's happening in your applications.

OpenShift's CLI offers the oc command that combines the functions of many Kubernetes commands, making it easier to use and manage containerized applications.

Kubernetes, on the other hand, requires users to manage multiple commands, such as kubectl, kubens, and kubectx, which can be time-consuming and overwhelming for beginners.

OpenShift's intuitive web dashboard allows users to perform almost all actions available via the CLI, making it a more user-friendly option.

Kubernetes, however, requires users to have a good understanding of containerized applications and their security, which can be a barrier for teams with less experience.

Here's a comparison of the two platforms:

OpenShift is restricted to certain operating systems, unlike Kubernetes which can run on multiple OSes. You can run Kubernetes masters and nodes on virtual machines with various operating systems, but OpenShift is limited to Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) 7.4 or later with the "Minimal" installation option and the latest packages from the Extras channel, or RHEL Atomic Host 7.4.5 or later for the master node.

The good news is that OpenShift now supports hosting platforms like AWS and vSphere with OpenShift 4, which was not the case before. This expansion of supported platforms makes it a more versatile option.

One thing to keep in mind is that OpenShift installation is a complex exercise, even when using Ansible, which is the recommended installation method for OpenShift. This is partly due to the complexity of the domain and the numerous variables that need to be tweaked.

OpenShift's CLI offers the oc command, which combines the functions of many Kubernetes commands, making it easier to use.

This command allows many actions such as support for logging, switching between projects and namespaces, and building container images from source, which require external tools on Kubernetes.

OpenShift's web dashboard is more intuitive and allows performing almost all actions available via the CLI.

This makes it easier for users to manage their applications and containers, especially for those who are new to containerized applications.

Kubernetes, on the other hand, has a steeper learning curve due to its open-source nature and the need for users to manage their own containerized applications.

Redhat's experience in developing user experience for their proprietary Gears technology has made OpenShift's user experience more polished.

OpenShift's ease of use is a major advantage for teams that have less experience with Kubernetes and security, allowing them to deploy their applications successfully without hassle.