DEV Community

Aditya Pratap Bhuyan
Aditya Pratap Bhuyan

Posted on

GitOps vs Traditional DevOps: Understanding the Key Differences and Benefits

Image description

Introduction

In the ever-evolving world of software development and operations, both GitOps and traditional DevOps have emerged as powerful frameworks for automating software delivery and operations. While they share many core principles, their approach to managing infrastructure and deployment processes varies greatly. This article will explore the key differences between GitOps and traditional DevOps workflows, diving deep into their respective approaches, benefits, and the scenarios in which each method excels.

What is DevOps?

To begin understanding GitOps, it’s crucial to first revisit what DevOps means. DevOps is a culture and set of practices that combines software development (Dev) and IT operations (Ops) to shorten the systems development lifecycle and provide continuous delivery with high software quality. It emphasizes collaboration between development and operations teams, automated testing, continuous integration (CI), continuous delivery (CD), and rapid iteration.

In traditional DevOps workflows, the focus is on automating and streamlining the development pipeline, from writing code to testing, and ultimately deploying it into production. Infrastructure management, application deployment, and continuous integration are all key components, and DevOps practices utilize a variety of tools like Jenkins, Ansible, Docker, Kubernetes, and more.

What is GitOps?

On the other hand, GitOps is a relatively newer approach that takes DevOps practices and refines them further. The fundamental principle of GitOps is to use Git as the single source of truth for both application code and infrastructure configurations. The state of the system (whether it’s the application, infrastructure, or both) is defined declaratively in Git repositories, and the actual system is continuously reconciled to match the desired state described in the Git repository.

GitOps utilizes Kubernetes and other cloud-native technologies to enable automated and continuous deployment, relying heavily on pull requests, version control, and declarative configurations. In a GitOps setup, any changes to infrastructure or code are made via Git commits, which then automatically trigger the necessary deployment process, ensuring the environment matches the desired state.

Key Differences Between GitOps and Traditional DevOps

While both GitOps and traditional DevOps share a common goal—streamlining software development and improving operational efficiency—their core approaches are markedly different.

  1. Source of Truth

In GitOps, Git repositories act as the single source of truth. All changes—whether they relate to infrastructure configurations or application code—are version-controlled within Git. This provides a highly auditable, consistent, and reproducible environment. Every change to infrastructure or application deployment is made through a pull request in Git, and the system is automatically updated to match the state defined in the repository. The desired state is explicitly stated, and the system automatically reconciles itself to this state.

In contrast, traditional DevOps may not use Git as the sole repository for infrastructure management. While code and application configurations are often stored in Git, the management of infrastructure itself might involve tools like Terraform, Ansible, Chef, or Puppet, which aren’t necessarily version-controlled in the same way. DevOps workflows often use multiple tools for deployment, testing, and infrastructure management, and the infrastructure state may be managed separately from the source code.

  1. Workflow & Automation

GitOps introduces a highly automated, declarative workflow. The process begins with developers or operators creating a Git commit with a change—whether it's modifying infrastructure configurations, application code, or both. These changes are pushed to the Git repository, and the GitOps tool (such as ArgoCD or Flux) automatically deploys the changes to the desired environment. This process is fully automated, reducing manual intervention and ensuring consistency across environments.

Traditional DevOps workflows also focus on automation but typically rely on more complex, imperative workflows. In a traditional DevOps pipeline, developers commit code to a repository, which triggers a Continuous Integration (CI) pipeline. However, infrastructure provisioning and application deployment might still require manual steps or specialized scripts. These processes often involve a series of tools—like Jenkins for CI/CD, Terraform for infrastructure as code (IaC), and Kubernetes for container orchestration—that must be configured to work together, which can sometimes lead to complexity and inconsistency.

  1. Declarative vs Imperative

GitOps is a declarative model. This means that users define the desired state of the infrastructure or application in the repository, and the system automatically works to reconcile the live environment with the state described in the Git repository. For instance, if a configuration file defines a Kubernetes deployment with specific settings, the GitOps system ensures that these settings are always applied, even if something goes wrong.

In traditional DevOps, the approach can be both imperative and declarative. In imperative systems, developers tell the system exactly how to achieve a task step-by-step (for example, telling it to deploy code to a specific server). While tools like Terraform or Helm allow for declarative configurations, many DevOps pipelines still require manual configuration or custom scripts to perform deployments and manage infrastructure, which introduces room for error.

  1. Infrastructure Management

One of the key benefits of GitOps is that it integrates application deployment and infrastructure management into a unified, streamlined workflow. Both the application code and its infrastructure are defined in Git, creating a single source of truth for the entire system. This ensures that both application code and infrastructure configurations are versioned, auditable, and reproducible. GitOps works particularly well in cloud-native environments, where Kubernetes is often used for managing application deployments, and infrastructure can be managed through Kubernetes manifests.

Traditional DevOps workflows typically treat infrastructure management separately from application code. Although there are many tools for Infrastructure as Code (IaC) like Terraform and CloudFormation, traditional DevOps pipelines can involve multiple tools and systems for managing applications and infrastructure. Infrastructure provisioning may not always be directly tied to version control systems, meaning there could be separate processes for managing code and the environment it runs in.

  1. Continuous Deployment & Delivery

GitOps is particularly well-suited for Continuous Deployment (CD). As soon as a change is made to a Git repository, the system automatically applies the change to the target environment. GitOps tools monitor the Git repository and reconcile the live environment with the desired state at all times, ensuring that the application or infrastructure is always up-to-date. This makes GitOps ideal for teams that need to deploy frequently and ensure consistency across environments.

In traditional DevOps, while Continuous Integration (CI) and Continuous Delivery (CD) are core principles, manual intervention is often required for deployments. While CI pipelines can be automated with tools like Jenkins or GitLab CI, the actual deployment process may require separate tools or manual steps. For example, deployments to production environments might need approval or involve additional testing, making traditional DevOps workflows less automated compared to GitOps.

  1. Monitoring, Rollbacks, and Self-Healing

An important feature of GitOps is self-healing and automatic rollbacks. If a GitOps-managed environment deviates from the desired state, the system can automatically detect the drift and trigger a reconciliation process to restore the environment. If a deployment goes wrong, the desired state can be rolled back simply by reverting a commit in Git, which then automatically triggers the rollback process in the environment.

In traditional DevOps, rollbacks often require manual intervention or additional tooling. Monitoring systems such as Prometheus and Grafana may be in place to detect issues, but the rollback process is usually more involved. DevOps teams must identify the problem, create a fix, and deploy the new version, which can introduce downtime or delays.

  1. Collaboration & Auditability

GitOps facilitates seamless collaboration between development and operations teams. Since all changes are tracked in Git, teams can easily collaborate on infrastructure changes or code deployments through pull requests, which provide full version history and change tracking. This ensures transparency and accountability, as all changes are documented and reviewed before deployment.

In traditional DevOps workflows, collaboration may not always be as transparent. While version control systems like Git are widely used for code changes, infrastructure changes may not always be documented in the same way. Different teams may use different tools for deployment and configuration, which could complicate collaboration and tracking.

When to Use GitOps vs Traditional DevOps

GitOps is ideal for teams looking for a simplified, automated workflow for managing both infrastructure and application deployment, especially in cloud-native environments that use Kubernetes. If your team values consistency, auditing, and self-healing capabilities, GitOps may be the best choice. Its declarative approach makes it particularly suited for teams that want to ensure the state of the system is always in sync with what’s described in Git.

On the other hand, traditional DevOps is a more flexible and comprehensive approach that may be more suitable for organizations with complex infrastructure, using a range of tools for different deployment and management tasks. If you need to manage on-premise infrastructure or work with multiple environments that don’t rely on Kubernetes, traditional DevOps may still be the better fit.

Conclusion

GitOps and traditional DevOps are both crucial for the delivery of modern software; yet, due to their distinct variances in workflow, infrastructure management, and automation, they are best suited for a variety of different kinds of businesses and situations. GitOps offers a method that is not only highly auditable but also highly efficient and automated for managing infrastructure and application code. This is especially useful in cloud-native configurations that use Kubernetes. The traditional DevOps framework, on the other hand, continues to be a flexible framework that provides flexibility in managing a wide variety of tool and infrastructure requirements.

Top comments (0)