Initial commit
This commit is contained in:
Zhongwei Li
243
references/argocd_vs_flux.md
Normal file
243
references/argocd_vs_flux.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,243 @@
|
||||
# ArgoCD vs Flux: Comprehensive Comparison (2024-2025)
|
||||
|
||||
## Current Versions (October 2025)
|
||||
|
||||
- **ArgoCD**: v3.1.9 (stable), v3.2.0-rc4 (release candidate)
|
||||
- **Flux**: v2.7.1 (latest)
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick Decision Matrix
|
||||
|
||||
| Criteria | Choose ArgoCD | Choose Flux |
|
||||
|----------|---------------|-------------|
|
||||
| **Primary Focus** | Developer experience, UI | Platform engineering, modularity |
|
||||
| **Team Size** | Medium-large teams | Small teams, platform engineers |
|
||||
| **UI Required** | Yes | No (CLI-driven) |
|
||||
| **Complexity** | Simpler onboarding | Steeper learning curve |
|
||||
| **Customization** | Less modular | Highly modular |
|
||||
| **Multi-tenancy** | Built-in with Projects | Manual configuration |
|
||||
| **Best For** | Application teams, demos | Infrastructure teams, advanced users |
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Differences
|
||||
|
||||
### Architecture
|
||||
|
||||
**ArgoCD**:
|
||||
- Monolithic design with integrated components
|
||||
- Web UI, API server, application controller in one system
|
||||
- Centralized control plane
|
||||
|
||||
**Flux**:
|
||||
- Modular microservices architecture
|
||||
- Separate controllers: source, kustomize, helm, notification, image-automation
|
||||
- Distributed reconciliation
|
||||
|
||||
### User Experience
|
||||
|
||||
**ArgoCD**:
|
||||
- Rich web UI for visualization and management
|
||||
- GUI dashboard for deployment, syncing, troubleshooting
|
||||
- Easier onboarding for developers
|
||||
- Better for demos and presentations
|
||||
|
||||
**Flux**:
|
||||
- CLI-driven (flux CLI + kubectl)
|
||||
- No built-in UI (can integrate with Weave GitOps UI separately)
|
||||
- Requires comfort with command-line tools
|
||||
- Steeper learning curve
|
||||
|
||||
### Application Management
|
||||
|
||||
**ArgoCD 3.x**:
|
||||
- Application and ApplicationSet CRDs
|
||||
- App-of-apps pattern for organizing applications
|
||||
- Fine-grained RBAC (new in v3.0)
|
||||
- Annotation-based tracking (default in v3.0, changed from labels)
|
||||
|
||||
**Flux 2.7**:
|
||||
- Kustomization and HelmRelease CRDs
|
||||
- No built-in grouping mechanism
|
||||
- RBAC through Kubernetes RBAC
|
||||
- Label-based tracking
|
||||
|
||||
### Multi-Cluster Support
|
||||
|
||||
**ArgoCD ApplicationSets**:
|
||||
- Cluster generator for auto-discovery
|
||||
- Matrix generator for cluster x app combinations
|
||||
- Hub-and-spoke pattern (one ArgoCD manages multiple clusters)
|
||||
- 83% faster deployments vs manual (30min → 5min)
|
||||
|
||||
**Flux Multi-Tenancy**:
|
||||
- Manual cluster configuration
|
||||
- Separate Flux installations per cluster or shared
|
||||
- More flexible but requires more setup
|
||||
- No built-in cluster generator
|
||||
|
||||
### Secrets Management
|
||||
|
||||
Both support:
|
||||
- Sealed Secrets
|
||||
- External Secrets Operator
|
||||
- SOPS
|
||||
|
||||
**ArgoCD 3.0 Change**:
|
||||
- Now explicitly endorses secrets operators
|
||||
- Cautions against config management plugins for secrets
|
||||
- Better integration with ESO
|
||||
|
||||
**Flux**:
|
||||
- Native SOPS integration with age encryption
|
||||
- Decryption happens in-cluster
|
||||
- .sops.yaml configuration support
|
||||
|
||||
### Progressive Delivery
|
||||
|
||||
**ArgoCD + Argo Rollouts**:
|
||||
- Separate project but tight integration
|
||||
- Rich UI for visualizing rollouts
|
||||
- Supports canary, blue-green, A/B testing
|
||||
- Metric analysis with Prometheus, Datadog, etc.
|
||||
|
||||
**Flux + Flagger**:
|
||||
- Flagger as companion project
|
||||
- CLI-driven
|
||||
- Supports canary, blue-green, A/B testing
|
||||
- Metric analysis with Prometheus, Datadog, etc.
|
||||
|
||||
## Feature Comparison
|
||||
|
||||
| Feature | ArgoCD 3.x | Flux 2.7 |
|
||||
|---------|-----------|----------|
|
||||
| **Web UI** | ✅ Built-in | ❌ (3rd party available) |
|
||||
| **CLI** | ✅ argocd | ✅ flux |
|
||||
| **Git Sources** | ✅ | ✅ |
|
||||
| **OCI Artifacts** | ❌ | ✅ (GA in v2.6) |
|
||||
| **Helm Support** | ✅ | ✅ |
|
||||
| **Kustomize** | ✅ (v5.7.0) | ✅ (v5.7.0) |
|
||||
| **Multi-tenancy** | ✅ Projects | Manual |
|
||||
| **Image Automation** | ⚠️ Via Image Updater | ✅ GA in v2.7 |
|
||||
| **Notifications** | ✅ | ✅ |
|
||||
| **RBAC** | ✅ Fine-grained (v3.0) | Kubernetes RBAC |
|
||||
| **Progressive Delivery** | Argo Rollouts | Flagger |
|
||||
| **Signature Verification** | ⚠️ Limited | ✅ cosign/notation |
|
||||
|
||||
## Performance & Scale
|
||||
|
||||
**ArgoCD**:
|
||||
- Can manage 1000+ applications per instance
|
||||
- Better defaults in v3.0 (resource exclusions reduce API load)
|
||||
- ApplicationSets reduce management overhead
|
||||
|
||||
**Flux**:
|
||||
- Lighter resource footprint
|
||||
- Better for large-scale monorepos
|
||||
- Source-watcher (v2.7) improves reconciliation efficiency
|
||||
|
||||
## Community & Support
|
||||
|
||||
**ArgoCD**:
|
||||
- CNCF Graduated project
|
||||
- Large community, many contributors
|
||||
- Akuity offers commercial support
|
||||
- Annual ArgoCon conference
|
||||
|
||||
**Flux**:
|
||||
- CNCF Graduated project
|
||||
- Weaveworks shutdown (Feb 2024) but project remains strong
|
||||
- Grafana Labs offers Grafana Cloud integration
|
||||
- GitOpsCon events
|
||||
|
||||
## Version 3.0 Changes (ArgoCD)
|
||||
|
||||
**Breaking Changes**:
|
||||
- Annotation-based tracking (default, was labels)
|
||||
- RBAC logs enforcement (no longer optional)
|
||||
- Removed legacy metrics (argocd_app_sync_status, etc.)
|
||||
|
||||
**New Features**:
|
||||
- Fine-grained RBAC (per-resource permissions)
|
||||
- Better defaults (resource exclusions for high-churn objects)
|
||||
- Secrets operators endorsement
|
||||
|
||||
## Version 2.7 Changes (Flux)
|
||||
|
||||
**New Features**:
|
||||
- Image automation GA
|
||||
- ExternalArtifact and ArtifactGenerator APIs
|
||||
- Source-watcher component
|
||||
- OpenTelemetry tracing support
|
||||
- CEL expressions for readiness
|
||||
|
||||
## Migration Considerations
|
||||
|
||||
### From ArgoCD → Flux
|
||||
|
||||
**Pros**:
|
||||
- Lower resource consumption
|
||||
- More modular architecture
|
||||
- Better OCI support
|
||||
- Native SOPS integration
|
||||
|
||||
**Cons**:
|
||||
- Lose web UI
|
||||
- More complex setup
|
||||
- Manual multi-tenancy
|
||||
|
||||
**Effort**: Medium-High (2-4 weeks for large deployment)
|
||||
|
||||
### From Flux → ArgoCD
|
||||
|
||||
**Pros**:
|
||||
- Gain web UI
|
||||
- Easier multi-tenancy
|
||||
- ApplicationSets for multi-cluster
|
||||
- Better for teams new to GitOps
|
||||
|
||||
**Cons**:
|
||||
- Higher resource consumption
|
||||
- Less modular
|
||||
- Limited OCI support
|
||||
|
||||
**Effort**: Medium (1-3 weeks)
|
||||
|
||||
## Recommendations by Use Case
|
||||
|
||||
### Choose ArgoCD if:
|
||||
- ✅ Developer teams need visibility (UI required)
|
||||
- ✅ Managing dozens of applications across teams
|
||||
- ✅ Multi-tenancy with Projects model
|
||||
- ✅ Fast onboarding is priority
|
||||
- ✅ Need built-in RBAC with fine-grained control
|
||||
|
||||
### Choose Flux if:
|
||||
- ✅ Platform engineering focus
|
||||
- ✅ Infrastructure-as-code emphasis
|
||||
- ✅ Using OCI artifacts extensively
|
||||
- ✅ Want modular, composable architecture
|
||||
- ✅ Team comfortable with CLI tools
|
||||
- ✅ SOPS+age encryption requirement
|
||||
|
||||
### Use Both if:
|
||||
- Different teams have different needs
|
||||
- ArgoCD for app teams, Flux for infrastructure
|
||||
- Separate concerns (apps vs infrastructure)
|
||||
|
||||
## Cost Considerations
|
||||
|
||||
**ArgoCD**:
|
||||
- Higher memory/CPU usage (~500MB-1GB per instance)
|
||||
- Commercial support available (Akuity)
|
||||
|
||||
**Flux**:
|
||||
- Lower resource footprint (~200-400MB total)
|
||||
- Grafana Cloud integration available
|
||||
|
||||
## Conclusion
|
||||
|
||||
**2024-2025 Recommendation**:
|
||||
- **For most organizations**: Start with ArgoCD for ease of use
|
||||
- **For platform teams**: Flux offers more control and modularity
|
||||
- **For enterprises**: Consider ArgoCD for UI + Flux for infrastructure
|
||||
- Both are production-ready CNCF Graduated projects
|
||||
|
||||
The choice depends more on team preferences and workflows than technical capability.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user