CloudFoundry vs Red Hat OpenShift

• Support for Orgs and Spaces that allow for managing users and deployables within a large organization.
• Easy deployment, deploying code is as simple as executing single line from CLI, thanks to build-packs.
• Solid and rich CLI, that allows for various operations on the instance.
• Isolated Virtual Machines called Droplets, that provide clean run time environment for the code. This used to be a problem with Weblogic and other application servers, where multiple applications are run on the same cluster and they share resources.
• SSH capability for the droplet (isolated VM's are called droplets), that allows for real time viewing of the App code while the application is running.
• Support for multiple languages, thanks to build-packs.
• Support for horizontal scaling, scaling an instance horizontally is a breeze.
• Support for configuring environment variable using the service bindings.
• Supports memory and disk space limit allocation for individual applications.
• Supports API's as well as workers (processes without endpoints)
• Supports blue-green deployment with minimal down time

Read full review

• The same as many similar K8 vendor solutions, OpenShift provides a managed Kubernetes environment with advanced facilitative components built-in.
• It provides the life cycle management/monitoring toolset to help users better visualize and understand both the application and infrastructure environment.
• Provides the scaling and recovering mechanism to ensure the high resilience of the application.
• CI/CD pipeline integration following the DevOps concept.

Read full review

• Does not support stateful containers and that would be a nice to have.
• Supports showing logs, but does not persist the logs anywhere. This makes relying on Cloud Foundry's logs very unreliable. The logs have to be persisted using other third party tools like Elk and Kibana.

Read full review

• The shift from v2 to v3 was a huge transition, and Red Hat [OpenShift] really failed at making this step easy for users - their documentation at the time was fairly lacking
• When things go wrong it can be hard to diagnose

Read full review

• Positive impact, since it simplifies the deployment time by a huge margin. Without cloud foundry, deploying a code needs coordination with infrastructure teams, while with cloud foundry, its a simple one line command. This reduces the deployment time from at least few hours to few minutes. Faster deployments promote faster dev cycle iterations.
• Code maintenance such as upgrading a Node or Java version is as simple as updating the build-pack. Without cloud foundry, using web logic, the specific version only supports a specific version of Java. So updating the version involves upgrading the version of web logic that needs to involve few teams. So without cloud foundry, it takes at least few days, with cloud foundry, its a matter of few mins.
• Overall, happier Developers and thats harder to quantify.

Read full review

• Reduce [the] friction of monitoring environments. This leads to [a] quicker troubleshooting process.
• Completely remove the need to authenticate each and every time you want to check on a specific environment.
• Faster deployment workflow increases [the] efficiency of developers when testing in lower environment containers.

Read full review