Consul: Add Consul vs Eureka comparison to website

[philsttr]

It would be great if the Consul vs Other Software section of the website included a comparison of Consul vs Eureka.

@armon provided a quick summary in the google group...

Could you please file a ticket? We can hopefully get this done in more detail, but in gist:

Eureka:

• AP (weak consistency), state is replicated with “best effort”
• Services are registered with one server, which attempts to replicate to other servers
• Service registrations have a TTL, and clients must heartbeat
• Reads are routed to any server, can be stale or missing data
• Scales well due to low coordination, especially when server failures relatively rare
• Fails if all servers down

Consul

• CP (strong consistency), state is replicated using Raft
• Services registered with any server, but written via Raft to a quorum
• Registrations have complex health checks, including gossip failure detection instead of heartbeating
• Reads routed to any server, consistent by default but stale reads can be requested
• Stale reads scale well, Consistent reads scale to tens of thousands per second
• Consistency offers locking and cluster coordination
• Lots more features (health checking, locking, KV, federation, ACLs)
• Fails if a majority of servers down

Hope that helps!

Best Regards,
Armon Dadgar

[joneepenk]

is this so hard? it's over a year and still open with no comment.

[slackpad]

Hi @joneepenk sorry we haven't gotten to this - it's not hard but there's a large backlog of small things like this and limited resources, so we have to focus our resources on higher priority things. Hopefully the summary above helps in the meantime.

[ghost]

@philsttr which is the best chooice in Distributed Systems? spring cloud supported the both.