D2iQ Mesosphere vs. Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud

Mesosphere is well suited for orchestrating workloads. It supports Docker as a container as well as support others. It is highly suitable for running resilient and auto recovering big data/application containers. Mesosphere has proven time and again to be production ready at a massive scale. It supports native single button/API call scale up and scale down and supports various deployment patterns like Blue-Green and others.

Incentivized

RedHat OpenShift is not only suited for IBM Cloud but can run in ANY cloud. We installed in Azure Cloud, for example. It can also run on Linux servers or a Power 9 machine. It is built for multi-cloud or on-prem environments. IBM support provides such excellent guidance in the installation and configuration that no other product on the market can beat it.

Incentivized

• Deploying mesosphere and friends (e.g. marathon)
• Deploying applications (e.g. Cassandra, Jenkins, Spark) on to mesosphere
• Providing value add components such as velocity, and marathon-lb

Incentivized

• Multiclick provisioning of resources makes it super easy to manage pods and deployments. We don't have to maintain code for the same
• In built security features and customizability ensures that organization wide standards are integrated well into the containers
• Automated backups, scale ups and fail recovery makes sure of minimal down time

Incentivized

• Setting up is a bit of a hassle, especially ZooKeeper state management and mesos and marathon quorum.
• Occasionally, I observed some failures when deploying something onto Marathon. Logging or detailed error reporting can help.
• Stale containers and inconsistent states resultant of the cluster failure are hard to solve and need a complete system restart to get it back to normal state.

Incentivized

• I wish it had better compatibility with docker file syntax. We had issues when it couldn't build standard docker files
• Wish it had better documentation
• Wish they offered fully supported client libraries for the Openshift API rather than dumping it on a 3rd party

Incentivized

I think response time for IBM Cloud support should be improved.

Incentivized

I happen to like mesosphere because it integrates well with a Jenkins based workflow, Deis is a little more Heroku like and it's not clear how to fit that model into a continuous-integration process. Kubernetes has also been criticized for being complicated.

Incentivized

We evaluated a number of potential solutions and ultimately chose Red Hat OpenShift because it was compatible with our existing technology. Time and costs savings have been realized throughout the company since we implemented Red Hat OpenShift, and the IT department has been freed up to focus on activities that are more valuable.

Incentivized

• I see mesosphere as having a positive impact overall on the industry trending Docker and containers in general.
• Seeing how mesosphere helps and simplifies things for the developer and ops, it is definitely a game changer.
• Native support of on demand scaling up and down as per the need is one of the best features.

Incentivized

• Our customer satisfaction and NPS score has had positive outcomes based on new architecture
• We are focused on business outcomes vs running the service and maintenance
• OpenShift on IBM Cloud has had a direct, positive impact on TCO, ROI, and payback period
• Our staff is more focused on higher-level business activities, i.e. acquiring & customer retention

Incentivized