Battle Of The Microservice Frameworks: Micronaut versus Quarkus edition!
summary
Micronaut and Quarkus target fast startup, low memory and GraalVM native images and both scaffold projects, provide Spring‑like DI, declarative HTTP clients and repository/query generation for persistence; Quarkus demo boots around 3.5s startup, Micronaut claims even faster in the sample and Quarkus shows slightly smaller runtime memory/JAR footprint (example image ~36 MB); native image creation is slow (about 15–20 minutes on Windows), integration tests run against embedded servers with random ports, and the demo tips the balance toward Quarkus.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (20)
- 0:00Microservice frameworks battle intro
- 1:08Marketing claims vs differences
- 3:52Setting up the first application
- 6:21Starting Quarkus app
- 7:47Quarkus CLI overview
- 8:52Quarkus programming model
- 10:18Fault tolerance & config
- 12:05Custom profiles & properties
- 13:53Spring ecosystem integration
- 14:13Database persistence
- 15:58Repository & query building
- 17:01Integration testing
- 18:48Testing with embedded servers
- 20:15Mocking & native testing
- 21:42Integration testing summary
- 22:24Native image benefits
- 23:28Startup time comparison
- 25:11Memory & performance
- 27:19Final performance comparison
- 28:25Conclusions & recommendations
related talks
01h 06m2020 - A space odyssey with Micronaut and Quarkus
36mJava: The new wave of Java web frameworks
17mAdopting Java for the Serverless world
44mQuarkus: Supersonic Subatomic Java
45mFaster, greener, and happier- why Quarkus should be your next tech stack
38mKeynote
52mQuarkus Supersonic Subatomic Java
45mIntruduction to Micronaut 2.0