Docker vs. Google Cloud Run

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Docker
Score 8.3 out of 10
N/A
Docker Enterprise was sold to Mirantis in 2019; that product is now sold as Mirantis Kubernetes Engine. But Docker now offers a 2-product suite that includes Docker Desktop, which they present as a fast way to containerize applications on a desktop; and, Docker Hub, a service for finding and sharing container images with a team and the Docker community, a repository of container images with an array of…
$0
unlimited public repositories
Google Cloud Run
Score 9.1 out of 10
N/A
Google Cloud Run enables users to build and deploy scalable containerized apps written in any language (including Go, Python, Java, Node.js, .NET, and Ruby) on a fully managed platform. Cloud Run can be paired with other container ecosystem tools, including Google's Cloud Build, Cloud Code, Artifact Registry, and Docker. And it features out-of-the-box integration with Cloud Monitoring, Cloud Logging, Cloud Trace, and Error Reporting to ensure the health of an application.N/A
Pricing
DockerGoogle Cloud Run
Editions & Modules
Free
$0
unlimited public repositories
Pro
$5.00
per month per user
Team
$7.00
per month per user
Business
$21
per month per user
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
DockerGoogle Cloud Run
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
YesYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
DockerGoogle Cloud Run
Features
DockerGoogle Cloud Run
Container Management
Comparison of Container Management features of Product A and Product B
Docker
-
Ratings
Google Cloud Run
7.3
Ratings
6% below category average
Security and Isolation00 Ratings8.60 Ratings
Container Orchestration00 Ratings8.40 Ratings
Cluster Management00 Ratings6.40 Ratings
Storage Management00 Ratings2.70 Ratings
Resource Allocation and Optimization00 Ratings8.10 Ratings
Discovery Tools00 Ratings7.60 Ratings
Update Rollouts and Rollbacks00 Ratings8.00 Ratings
Self-Healing and Recovery00 Ratings8.10 Ratings
Analytics, Monitoring, and Logging00 Ratings7.50 Ratings
Best Alternatives
DockerGoogle Cloud Run
Small Businesses
Git
Git
Score 10.0 out of 10
Portainer
Portainer
Score 9.6 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Git
Git
Score 10.0 out of 10
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.3 out of 10
Enterprises
Git
Git
Score 10.0 out of 10
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.3 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
DockerGoogle Cloud Run
Likelihood to Recommend
10.0
(0 ratings)
8.2
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
9.1
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
10.0
(0 ratings)
6.4
(0 ratings)
Availability
10.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Performance
8.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Product Scalability
10.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
DockerGoogle Cloud Run
Likelihood to Recommend
You are going to be able to find the most resources and examples using Docker whenever you are working with a container orchestration software like Kubernetes. There will always some entropy when you run in a container, a containerized application will never be as purely performant as an app running directly on the OS. However, in most scenarios this loss will be negligible to the time saved in deployment, monitoring, etc.
Read full review
Microservices and RestFul API application as it is fast and reliant. Seamless integration with event triggers such as pubsub or event arc, so you can easily integrate that with usecases with file uploads, database changes, etc. Basically great with short-lived tasks, if however, you have long-running processses, Cloud Run might not be idle for this. For example if you have a long running data processing task, other solutions such as kubeflow pipelines or dataflow are more suited for this kind of tasks. Cloud Run is also stateless, so if you need memory, you will have to connect an external database.
Read full review
Pros
  • Kubernetes context switching - very handy
  • Integrate well and seamless - No complicated setup and or UX
  • Ease of updating images and etc - very important
Read full review
  • Real-time autoscaling. Escalamento automático em tempo real
  • Simplified Continuous Deployment. Implantação contínua simplificada
  • Running tasks in the background. Execução de tarefas em segundo plano
Read full review
Cons
  • It will be nice to see an admin UI for configuration of images
  • Container networking can be simplified
  • Data storage/volume management can be simplified
Read full review
  • Cloud Run doesn't allow you to redeploy an already existing revision which can be inconvenient in some use cases
  • Tricky to get the deployment working to start but once it's working that's great
  • The actual deployment is not the fastest but it's not too bad
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
No answers on this topic
We definitely need to renew it because we dont own our own infrastructure and storage and we are happy with Cloud Run features
Read full review
Usability
I have been using Docker for more than 3 years and it really simplifies the modern application development and deployment. I like the ability of Docker to improve efficiency, portability and scalability for developers and operations teams. Another reason for giving this rating is because Docker integrates CI/CD pipelines very well
Read full review
The UI/console is great... the documentation is top-notch for developers, but the CLI itself when you have to script around it is very complex and easy to forget some options... the downside of a generic command line client.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
Haven't seen any outages, fatal/unrecoverable errors in my usage so far. Enough said.
Read full review
Not seen any major issues when we run applications its good
Read full review
Performance
Docker Desktop. The CPU high usage is a known issue. Needs fixing. Otherwise, it is great overall. Would not use anything else still.
Read full review
Initially we felt slow but slowly it picked up and easy to manage
Read full review
Implementation Rating
No answers on this topic
I was involved in the initial implementation setup, Its easy with the given documentaiton we can do ourself. Not that critical
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
We need a solution where initially we can use an OS to trigger our pipeline to be used by terraform and then later in ansible. After doing all work it automatically get exited and we can reclaim the space of our VM. So we created a gitlab pipeline and at the initial stage we defined a docker file which will be our base image and we performed all our activities inside that image to build infrastructure using terraform. Integration we have done in our gitlab pipeline and finally we remove the docker image so that the space can be reclaimed immediately.
Read full review
AWS Lambda supports code zip package, enabling lower cold start time. Also, AWS Lambda pricing is much simpler, easier to understand.
Other than that, the 2 products are very similar, including the Docker image support: the image must be built based on proprietary base image.
Obviously, if your other services are running in GCP, then Google Cloud Run is your only choice for tight integration, & private networking.
Read full review
Scalability
It is the only tool in our toolset that has not [had] any issues so far. That is really a mark of reliability, and it's a testimony to how well the product is made, and a tool that does its job well is a tool well worth having. It is the base tool that I would say any organisation must have if they do scalable deployment.
Read full review
It has good auto scale feature and reliable also
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • With Docker adoption, were able to reduce 40% of the time taken to complete workspace setup
  • Provided the environment packaging / configurability capability which enabled resource sharing and interoperability across teams
  • Were able to leverage off the shelf images provided by leading product companies which increased reliability and security exponently
Read full review
  • It has saved us some costs since we now do not require a live server and have moved to a serverless workflow for these services
  • Breaking changes do not affect the entire application now that we have separated our concerns using a serverless service
  • Much easier to debug since we can now isolate our services and reduce the search space for finding/fixing bugs
Read full review
ScreenShots