AWS Elastic Beanstalk is the platform-as-a-service offering provided by Amazon and designed to leverage AWS services such as Amazon Elastic Cloud Compute (Amazon EC2), Amazon Simple Storage Service (Amazon S3).
$0
Users pay for AWS resources (e.g. EC2, S3 buckets, etc.) used to store and run the application.
GraalVM
Score 9.1 out of 10
N/A
GraalVM is a universal virtual machine for running applications written in JavaScript, Python, Ruby, R, JVM-based languages like Java, Scala, Groovy, Kotlin, Clojure, and LLVM-based languages such as C and C++.
GraalVM removes the isolation between programming languages and enables interoperability in a shared runtime. It can run either standalone or in the context of OpenJDK, Node.js or Oracle Database.
Oracle's GraalVM Enterprise is a multilingual virtual machine, which Oracle states…
N/A
Pricing
AWS Elastic Beanstalk
GraalVM
Editions & Modules
No Charge
$0
Users pay for AWS resources (e.g. EC2, S3 buckets, etc.) used to store and run the application.
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
AWS Elastic Beanstalk
GraalVM
Free Trial
No
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
Yes
Yes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
Optional
Additional Details
—
GraalVM Enterprise is an entitlement with Java SE Subscription at no additional cost.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
AWS Elastic Beanstalk
GraalVM
Considered Both Products
AWS Elastic Beanstalk
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose AWS Elastic Beanstalk
In some of the other companies that I've worked in, I've had the opportunity to work with the above softwares where the structure and architecture of the services was much complicated but the above softwares were able to handle it with more ease and efficiency. The complex …
There are many services like AWS Elastic beanstalk, but there are none with the maturity in the platform or the cost-effectiveness of AWS Elastic Beanstalk. Also, AWS Elastic Beanstalk is the oldest among them, so there are more people with AWS experience than the other …
I have used App Engine on Google Cloud Platform and App Service on Microsoft Azure. Both offer similar capabilities to AWS Elastic Beanstalk. App Engine has the nice ability to scale to 0 instances when the application has not been in use for some time. This allows for …
As it supports end to end flow of application deployment and not a part of any individual process like other AWS products, AWS Elastic Beanstalk can be a game changer in cloud industry.
The AWS platform provides a great deal of configurability that is abstracted and provided very well through AWS Elastic Beanstalk. This is the main reason for choosing Elastic Beanstalk over competing services. Another reason for selecting AWS Beanstalk was vendor …
I selected AWS Elastic Beanstalk mainly because we have been using AWS services for our company. Using AWS Elastic Beanstalk is relatively easier than starting to use a completely new cloud platform. But we are also reviewing Google App Engine, and found out Elastic Beanstalk …
AWS Elastic Beanstalk is equivalent to Google App Engine in terms of product. I selected AWS Elastic Beanstalk because it was within the stack we were using, and it made sense for us given the other architecture.
Public & Private Cloud Senior Business Technology Engineer
Chose AWS Elastic Beanstalk
We now default to Amazon ECS, due to flexibility this gives us with how workloads scale, and more network flexibility as many of our workloads are internal / external facing. We selected Elastic Beanstalk at beginning of our containerization phase, which suited our needs …
Azure currently doesn't have a solution that's similar to this but you can do a lot of the features with several of the components that Microsoft Azure offers. AWS Elastic Beanstalk exists in that niche market where if you have an existing solution, this is a great way to move &…
AWS is much more focused on scalability, but Heroku was much easier to get things up and running as a beginner. For simple hosting, I would stick to something like Heroku or Netlify. That said, Elastic Beanstalk is meant for more performant functions requiring large scaling and …
AWS Elastic Beanstalk is a great option for an organization that's already invested in the AWS ecosystem. The greater the number of complementary features needed by the application (e.g. integrating with Amazon's Elastic Load Balancer, databases, etc), the greater the reward …
We also use Heroku and it is a great platform for smaller projects and light Node.js services, but we have found that in terms of cost, the Elastic Beanstalk option is more affordable for the projects that we undertake. The fact that it sits inside of the greater AWS Cloud …
I enjoyed that Lightsail was so simple to provision and access via the in-browser SSH terminal, but ultimately Elastic Beanstalk is a more robust offering that interfaces seamlessly with more of AWS's other services. Elastic Beanstalk is also better equipped to automate …
I selected these solutions because they are the closest to being able to set up separate server or VM instances. As far as performance and scalability, Heroku does offer an autoscale option, but the base cost to have the autoscale in place, sets Heroku behind EBS. Digital …
Honestly, I haven't tried any other alternative products. As already mentioned, I am already heavily invested in AWS, so EBS was a natural choice for me. In other reviews, I have found, AWS is better than its competitors. There are more flavors, and options in AWS, better …
Heroku is another similar product which we had tried out to deploy one of the NodeJs project and it has lot of developer friendly features as well. Though Heroku is more expensive than Beanstalk is what I found. Heroku also has some restrictions which can affect the …
The other main competitor that I have used would probably be Heroku. While Heroku is incredibly simple and easy to get a sample web app online, its dashboard and product connectivity didn't feel quite as seamless as AWS Elastic Beanstalk. AWS Elastic Beanstalk has a higher up …
The reason why we had to select GraalVM one is [a] cutting-edge compiling technique, GraalVM is well operated in the Environment of Open JDK, which speeds up the execution of Java programs. GraalVM makes creating packages and native apps simpler, and this improves distribution. …
GraalVM is at the top when it comes to executing Java applications in terms of speed. With its amazing fast ahead of its time compiler it helps in reducing the startup time of the applications. Also, the overall performance of the product is increased and reduces the latency as …
We previously used the Java Virtual Machine common in the development market. In comparison, it is a solution that consumes a lot of computational resources. GraalVM is a solution that brings advantages such as less RAM usage and codes running natively.
.Net 4.5 has been very similar but I feel GraalVM is a lot better with features, efficiency, and user-friendly UI. This is especially important for our team.
Software Engineering Manager - Edge and Cloud Native Productline
Chose GraalVM
GraalVM provides a solution with better customer support and better technical solutions for application compilation and runtime. It's faster cold startup time aids mission-critical applications and helps the overall suite of applications. With this we can use multiple …
The main strength from my point of view is the usability and also the documentation which I really appreciate once it makes it easier to use and also faster. In another hand, the price can be something that you must check before choosing the proper tool once it's really …
The packaging of GraalVM is completely different form the above-listed products, it is more like an integration platform. The out of box solutions for technologies like Java, and using with iOS native image is one of the examples. And easily used with Gradle and Maven build …
GraalVM allowed language interoperability compared to the other two. Corretto is no better than the default HotSpot JVM in our case and is also lacking in modern versions. Oracle Java has JDK 15 but it doesn't have language interoperability or AOT. GraalVM just hit that nice …
GraalVM allows for better language interop between languages compared to JNI, and also supports other languages for scripting like Python, Ruby and others. This means seemless modding capability compared to the normal JDK and other things.
Oracle GraalVM has been selected due to its ability to perform ahead-of time compilation by compiling JAVA code to native image which helps in scaling up the performance of the application startup and execution time, thus consuming low memory and CPU cycles. Also, supporting …
GraalVM by far has proved to be the most reliable and advanced virtual machine supporting dual compilation (Static as well as Dynamic). Java Code is compiled by an ahead-of-time compiler to a native image that supports JVM based languages (Java, Scala, etc.) as well as other …
We have opted for GraalVM due to its ability to integrate and interoperability with major languages (such as Java, JavaScript, Ruby, Python, LLVM based languages like C and C++, and several other dynamic languages) popular in the IT industry. Due to its compatibility with Java …
The advantages of GraalVM over other products are as follows:
1. All the languages share the same VM and its capabilities. Provides language-independent tooling interoperability optimization.
2. It has a very reduced memory footprint.
GraalVM has the ability to compile Java applications ahead of time into a native binary. This will result in instant startup of the application and consuming significantly less memory compared to traditional JIT (Just in Time) compilation setup. Though JIT is preferable for …
GraalVM can run faster than the traditionally used Java SE. Companies like Twitter are using GraalVM as against using JAVA SE to scale up their production values and save money. It has a Graal compiler and polyglot feature missing in Java SE, which is a mix and match of …
We used Azure App Service along with stream analytics both have their own pros and cons. GraalVM is better for Java native codes while Azure is for C# and .NET. Both are good, in a sense, but for our native apps GraalVM is better. We would like to see how it does in the long run.
AWS Elastic Beanstalk is well suited for [the] rapid development of applications that use standard compute platforms based on popular programming languages. So getting a Go, Python, Ruby, or Node.js app going in AWS Elastic Beanstalk will be easy. For non-standard applications, containers provide another option for using AWS Elastic Beanstalk. In either case, AWS Elastic Beanstalk is well suited for applications that are [self-contained]. AWS Elastic Beanstalk is also good for development or test environments that need a built-in deployment method. AWS Elastic Beanstalk is less appropriate for complex applications that rely on multiple AWS services. While deploying and running the base code might be easy to get going, it may be difficult to apply permissions and integrations with the other services.
If you want to have a cool VM, don't spend too much memory and mainly being multilanguage go ahead. Be aware there are some points that can be improved like a couple of languages are not accepted so far. Like used to, it's easy to use and you can find a lot of information regarding the tool so if you need to do something fast, it's a good choice.
How to more easily integrate with other other AWS services. There are plenty out there, but it's not quite as seamless as I feel like it should be to mix and match products.
Make backing up easier when scaling the server. It took quite a bit of time to make sure we had everything set up in case something went wrong.
When you are first starting to use AWS, the dashboard can be very intimidating. There are countless products all with names that aren't very indicative of what they actually do.
As our technology grows, it makes more sense to individually provision each server rather than have it done via beanstalk. There are several reasons to do so, which I cannot explain without further diving into the architecture itself, but I can tell you this. With automation, you also loose the flexibility to morph the system for your specific needs. So if you expect that in future you need more customization to your deployment process, then there is a good chance that you might try to do things individually rather than use an automation like beanstalk.
The overall usability is good enough, as far as the scaling, interactive UI and logging system is concerned, could do a lot better when it comes to the efficiency, in case of complicated node logics and complicated node architectures. It can have better software compatibility and can try to support collaboration with more softwares
As I described earlier it has been really cost effective and really easy for fellow developers who don't want to waste weeks and weeks into learning and manually deploying stuff which basically takes month to create and go live with the Minimal viable product (MVP). With AWS Beanstalk within a week a developer can go live with the Minimal viable product easily.
The support we received when porting legacy applications from the GraalVM team and community was commendable. We were able to get assistance in introducing alternatives for the libraries we were using where appropriate. GraalVM support was also able to help us with some configuration options we were stuck with for configuring deployment environments on AWS compute.
- Do as many experiments as you can before you commit on using beanstalk or other AWS features. - Keep future state in mind. Think through what comes next, and if that is technically possible to do so. - Always factor in cost in terms of scaling. - We learned a valuable lesson when we wanted to go multi-region, because then we realized many things needs to change in code. So if you plan on using this a lot, factor multiple regions.
There are many services like AWS Elastic beanstalk, but there are none with the maturity in the platform or the cost-effectiveness of AWS Elastic Beanstalk. Also, AWS Elastic Beanstalk is the oldest among them, so there are more people with AWS experience than the other platforms. The only thing is their documentation and UX are a bit old, which doesn't stop it from performing greatly, but yes, if you are looking for better UX, then you can check out other options.
The reason why we had to select GraalVM one is [a] cutting-edge compiling technique, GraalVM is well operated in the Environment of Open JDK, which speeds up the execution of Java programs. GraalVM makes creating packages and native apps simpler, and this improves distribution. It also brings native image support [that] makes compilation and distribution easy and effective.
Elastic Beanstalk removes countless hours from development team responsibility, freeing up those resources to instead focus on building the products that our customers want to use.
As a business that is already embedded into using EC2 instances, it's essentially free to leverage the work that AWS performs on configuring the Elastic Beanstalk stacks.
With Elastic Beanstalk, while there is still a responsibility to ensure that applications can work with updated underlying dependencies, it's much easier when AWS handled the heavy lifting of updating the stacks.
Financial: Increased Java container count on the same hardware.
Performance: Decreased cold start time for container startup.
Training: Adopting GraalVM has a learning curve. This requires investment in time and resources. The benefits come through re-evaluating our current deployments for optimization.