Cloud Foundry Compared with Other PaaSes
summary
Authors build a 50 feature matrix across eight groups and score platforms 0–3 scoring (0 none, 3 leader), noting the study is subjective and potentially biased. Empirical checks include a Java app/day scenario and a dataset showing ~60–70% of apps are job-style apps using relational databases. Findings: AWS/Elastic Beanstalk excels at integrated services but takes 15 minutes spin-up; Heroku gives the smoothest UX and router-held requests for near-zero downtime; Cloud Foundry wins Java with a Java buildpack leader and centralized logs but lacks built-in shell access, CI plumbing, and turnkey zero-downtime updates.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (17)
- 0:00Introduction to talk
- 1:05Background and methodology
- 3:55Limitations and biases
- 6:03Workload and tooling comparison
- 7:06Integration services and SLA
- 8:30Data stores and programming models
- 9:13Management features overview
- 10:16Quality of experience tests
- 12:04Amazon BeanStalk review
- 13:50Google App Engine review
- 14:53Microsoft Azure review
- 15:33OpenShift user experience
- 17:00Heroku platform review
- 19:09Cloud Foundry strengths
- 21:16Cloud Foundry improvements needed
- 22:40Summary and future steps
- 24:05Q&A session
related talks
48mCloud Foundry - your PaaS on OpenStack
02mCloud Foundry
02mCloud Foundry
06mThe Gold Standard in Platform Engineering: Cloud Foundry :)
30mCloud Foundry: The Gaps
01mCloud Foundry: The Right Tool for the Right Job
33mCloud Foundry Weekly: Live at CF Day Germany
33mPublic Cloud Foundry Platforms in Europe: What Have We Learned and Where Can We Go Next?