website: Mesos

website/source/intro/vs/mesos.html.md

@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+---
+layout: "intro"
+page_title: "Nomad vs. Mesos with Aurora, Marathon, etc"
+sidebar_current: "vs-other-mesos"
+description: |-
+  Comparison between Nomad and Mesos with Aurora, Marathon, etc
+---
+
+# Nomad vs. Mesos with Aurora, Marathon
+
+Mesos is a resource manager, which is used to pool together the
+resources of a datacenter and exposes an API to integrate with
+Frameworks that have scheduling and job management logic. Mesos
+depends on ZooKeeper to provide both coordination and storage.
+
+There are many different frameworks that integrate with Mesos,
+popular general purpose ones include Aurora and Marathon.
+These frameworks allow users to submit jobs and implement scheduling
+logic. All frameworks depend on Mesos for resource management
+and external system, like ZooKeeper, to provide coordination and storage.
+
+Nomad is architecturally much simpler. Nomad is a single binary, both for clients
+and servers, and requires no external services for coordination or storage.
+Nomad combines features of both resource managers and schedulers into a single system.
+This makes Nomad operationally simpler and enables more sophisticated
+optimizations.
+
+Nomad is designed to be a global state, optimistically concurrent scheduler.
+Global state means schedulers get access to the entire state of the cluster when
+making decisions enabling richer constraints, job priorities, resource preemption,
+and faster placements. Optimistic concurrency allows Nomad to make scheduling
+decisions in parallel increasing throughput, reducing latency, and increasing
+the scale that can be supported.
+
+Mesos does not support federation or multiple failure isolation regions.
+Nomad supports multi-datacenter and multi-region configurations for failure
+isolation and scalability.
+