Openshift vs Rancher: A Comprehensive Comparison and Guide

If you're considering container orchestration platforms, you've likely come across Openshift and Rancher. Both are popular choices, but they have their differences.

Openshift is a cloud-native container platform developed by Red Hat, while Rancher is a more comprehensive platform that offers a range of tools for container management, including Kubernetes.

In terms of pricing, Openshift offers a more traditional subscription-based model, whereas Rancher offers a free version with optional paid upgrades.

For enterprises, Openshift may be a more suitable choice due to its tighter integration with Red Hat's ecosystem and support for a wider range of applications.

When choosing between OpenShift and Rancher, consider the complexity of your environment. OpenShift offers more out-of-the-box integrations with CI/CD tools, logging, and monitoring solutions.

Think about your organization's scalability needs. OpenShift is ideal for large-scale deployments due to its robust feature set and enterprise-grade capabilities.

Consider your compliance and security requirements. If you have stringent needs, OpenShift's comprehensive security features and compliance certifications might be more suitable.

Before choosing a container management platform, consider the tools and services you need to integrate with it. OpenShift offers more out-of-the-box integrations with CI/CD tools.

This can be a significant advantage in complex enterprise environments, where multiple systems need to work together seamlessly.

Assessing scalability needs is crucial to ensure your organization can grow and adapt to changing demands. OpenShift's robust feature set makes it ideal for large-scale deployments.

To determine your scalability needs, consider the size and growth rate of your organization. If you're a smaller, rapidly growing setup, Rancher's flexibility and ease of use may be more beneficial.

Think about the type of setup you need. If you're expecting rapid growth, you'll want a solution that can adapt quickly. Rancher's ease of use can help with this, while OpenShift's robust feature set is better suited for larger, more established organizations.

Ultimately, you want a solution that can grow with your organization. By considering your scalability needs, you can choose the right tool for the job and avoid costly upgrades down the line.

Rancher and OpenShift are both Kubernetes cluster administrators, used to provide web console and CLI access to make management and usage easier.

Rancher is a tool for managing Kubernetes clusters, allowing you to create clusters with RKE or manage brought-in clusters from on-premises Kubernetes, EKS, GKE, or other cloud-hosted clusters.

Both Rancher and OpenShift are built on top of Kubernetes, with OpenShift being a downstream distribution of the open-source project.

Rancher provides a web UI and CLI for automation, as well as user roles and permissions to apply to clusters and projects.

OpenShift has two major variants: OpenShift Container Platform (OCP) and OKD (also known as OpenShift Origin), with OCP being the enterprise version from Red Hat and OKD being the community version.

Consider your organization's specific needs and requirements, as this will greatly impact your decision between Rancher and OpenShift.

Rancher is more flexible when it comes to infrastructure requirements, working with multiple cloud providers, whereas OpenShift offers tighter integration with specific providers like AWS in its managed offerings.

Evaluate the level of Kubernetes expertise within your organization, as this will also influence your choice. If your team is experienced with Kubernetes, Rancher may be a more straightforward choice.

Determine whether you need advanced enterprise features, such as strict security controls, compliance certifications, and built-in developer tools. OpenShift is designed for enterprise use and offers a more comprehensive feature set.

Assess the importance of commercial support, training, and consulting services for your organization. Both Rancher and OpenShift provide commercial support options, but OpenShift, backed by Red Hat, might offer a more comprehensive range of services.

Here's a quick comparison of the two platforms:

To make an informed decision, weigh these factors according to your priorities and consider running a proof-of-concept with both platforms to evaluate their suitability for your use case.

Rancher's installation process is designed to be user-friendly and accessible, allowing users to quickly deploy it on an existing Kubernetes cluster or as a standalone Docker container using a single command.

Installing OpenShift is more complex compared to Rancher, requiring setting up various components such as etcd, a container registry, and an API server.

The installation of OpenShift can be a time-consuming process, with some users reporting installation times of between 3 days and a couple of weeks.

Rancher installation is a simple helm install to a small RKE cluster, which itself can be created with only one node and a simple config.

OpenShift's installation creates a temporary instance that it has control over, creates a basic Kubernetes install on it, and uses it to bootstrap a cluster, then transfers control over to the new cluster, and deletes the instance.

Rancher offers a simple installation with helm install to RKE cluster, making it easy to expand the cluster with just a few simple commands.

OpenShift's controller nodes can only be installed on RHEL (Fedora) CoreOS, limiting the flexibility of its installation process compared to Rancher.

OpenShift has stricter security policies, including forbidding the running of a container as root and offering a secure-by-default option to enhance security.

Rancher's security features are basic, requiring additional configuration and third-party tools to meet strict enterprise security requirements. This might not be suitable for organizations with stringent compliance and security needs.

OpenShift's comprehensive security features and compliance certifications make it a more suitable choice for enterprises with high security standards. Rancher, on the other hand, might require additional tools to meet the same standards.

OpenShift is designed with enterprise security in mind, offering advanced security features like Security-Enhanced Linux (SELinux) integration, automated security updates, and compliance certifications like FIPS 140-2 and Common Criteria.

OpenShift has an in-built image registry, which pairs seamlessly with DockerHub or Red Hat, making it easy for developers to search for and manage container images.

Rancher, on the other hand, works in conjunction with RKE, Rancher Lab's own Kubernetes distribution, to provide a full clustered environment, along with managing externally created clusters.

Both OpenShift and Rancher are built on top of Kubernetes, the leading container orchestration platform, and both simplify and streamline the deployment, scaling, and management of containerized applications across multiple clusters.

Here are some key similarities between OpenShift and Rancher:

OpenShift and Rancher are both powerful tools for managing containerized applications, but they have some key differences in terms of features and functionality.

OpenShift is a Kubernetes distribution with extra features built-in, or easily added, making it a platform for developing and deploying containerized applications. It has a wide range of tools for creating container images, including CI/CD pipelines, operators, helm charts, and container images.

Rancher, on the other hand, works in conjunction with RKE, Rancher Lab's own Kubernetes distribution, to provide a full clustered environment, along with managing externally created clusters.

Both OpenShift and Rancher offer a user-friendly graphical interface for managing Kubernetes clusters, simplifying the user experience and reducing the learning curve for new users.

Here are some key similarities between OpenShift and Rancher:

In terms of integration requirements, OpenShift offers more out-of-the-box integrations with CI/CD tools, logging, and monitoring solutions, which can be beneficial for complex enterprise environments.

Both OpenShift and Rancher have their own application catalogs, with OpenShift offering many add-ons to provide extra features, and Rancher providing a catalog with many applications that can be deployed to a cluster, including monitoring and backups.

OpenShift also has the Advanced Cluster Manager, which lets you manage multiple clusters through a central console, making it very well geared toward development.

Kubernetes doesn't have an integrated image registry, so you'll need to create your own or use a private registry to pull images for your pods.

You can make your own Docker registry to manage your container images, giving you more control over your image management process.

OpenShift, however, has an in-built image registry that pairs seamlessly with DockerHub or Red Hat, making it easier to search for and manage container images.

Image streams in OpenShift allow developers to effortlessly manage container images, streamlining their development workflow.

Rancher is a great tool for managing multiple clusters with a single interface. It's perfect for when you have multiple clusters to manage, especially if you have users with different permissions across those clusters.

You can use Rancher to manage various types of clusters, making it a versatile option. It's also easy to install on any system that runs Docker.

Rancher is a good choice if you're using RHEL or other distributions, or if you need to manage many clusters from a central location.

Kubernetes lacks a built-in networking solution, but users can employ third-party network plug-ins.

OpenShift, on the other hand, comes with its own out-of-the-box networking solution called Open vSwitch, which includes three native plug-ins.

You can choose from two versions of OpenShift: a commercial product called the OpenShift Container Platform, or a public cloud option called OpenShift Online and OpenShift Dedicated.

The OpenShift Container Platform is developed and managed by Red Hat developers, offering paid administration and infrastructure management with dedicated support and periodical upgrades.

OpenShift also has an open-source version called OKD, which is a community edition platform that's limited to self-support.

When it comes to user experience, OpenShift stands out from the competition. OpenShift features an intuitive web console that includes a one-touch login page, making it easy for users to access and manage their applications.

The OpenShift console offers a simple, form-based interface that allows users to add, delete, and modify resources with ease. This user-friendly interface is a major advantage over Kubernetes, which contains a complex web interface that can be overwhelming for new users.

OpenShift's console provides a seamless experience for users, eliminating the need for users to install the Kubernetes dashboard and use kube-proxy to send their machine's port to the cluster server. This streamlined process saves users time and reduces the risk of errors.

Here are some key differences between OpenShift and Kubernetes user experiences:

Overall, OpenShift's user experience is designed to make it easy for users to access and manage their applications, while Kubernetes' complex interface can be a barrier to entry for new users.