Software Alternatives, Accelerators & Startups

Heroku CI VS Runnable

Compare Heroku CI VS Runnable and see what are their differences

Note: These products don't have any matching categories. If you think this is a mistake, please edit the details of one of the products and suggest appropriate categories.

Heroku CI logo Heroku CI

Continuous Integration from Heroku

Runnable logo Runnable

We're thrilled to announce the Runnable team is joining MuleSoft.
  • Heroku CI Landing page
    Landing page //
    2023-03-14
  • Runnable Landing page
    Landing page //
    2021-09-19

Heroku CI features and specs

  • Seamless Integration
    Heroku CI is tightly integrated with Heroku Pipelines, making it easy to deploy successfully tested builds directly into different stages, streamlining the deployment process.
  • Easy Setup
    Heroku CI provides a straightforward setup process, particularly for existing Heroku applications. This makes it accessible for teams who are already using Heroku for their application hosting.
  • Ephemeral Test Environments
    Heroku CI automatically provisions and tears down application environments for tests, ensuring a clean state for each test run and reducing the likelihood of false positives/negatives caused by environment differences.
  • Built-in Support for Multiple Languages
    Offers native support for a variety of programming languages supported by Heroku, allowing diverse teams to implement CI processes without additional configuration.
  • Parallel Test Execution
    Enables parallel execution of test suites, which can significantly reduce overall testing time and speed up the development and deployment cycles.

Possible disadvantages of Heroku CI

  • Cost
    Heroku CI can be expensive for teams or projects that require many CI environments or frequent builds, as it operates on Heroku's dyno cost model.
  • Limited Customization
    Compared to more robust CI/CD tools, Heroku CI offers less flexibility and customization options, which might be restrictive for complex build processes or unique testing requirements.
  • Integration Limitations
    While Heroku CI integrates well with Heroku Pipelines, it may not offer the same level of integration or support for other popular CI/CD tools and services, potentially complicating mixed-environment setups.
  • Performance Limitations
    The performance of the CI process is tied to the dyno types utilized in Heroku, and can be limited by the dyno configurations, impacting the speed and efficiency of running tests.
  • Dependency on Heroku Ecosystem
    Heroku CI is primarily beneficial if you are already using Heroku for deployment, which may not be suitable for teams relying on different cloud providers or those seeking vendor independence.

Runnable features and specs

  • Ease of Use
    Runnable provides a user-friendly interface that simplifies the process of setting up, deploying, and managing containerized applications.
  • Rapid Prototyping
    The platform allows developers to quickly spin up development environments, enabling faster prototyping and testing of new features.
  • Isolation of Environments
    Runnable enables the creation of isolated environments, which helps in preventing conflicts between different development stages and versions.
  • Integration
    Runnable offers seamless integration with various CI/CD tools and version control systems like GitHub, which enhances the development workflow.
  • Collaboration
    The platform supports collaborative work among development teams, allowing for shared environments and easier team collaboration.

Possible disadvantages of Runnable

  • Learning Curve
    Although designed to be user-friendly, new users might still face a learning curve when familiarizing themselves with the platform's features and functionality.
  • Resource Limitations
    Platform constraints in terms of available resources might limit the ability to fully scale or test resource-intensive applications efficiently.
  • Cost
    Depending on usage patterns and required features, cost can be a potential issue for smaller teams or startups operating on limited budgets.
  • Performance
    The reliance on shared platform infrastructure may lead to potential performance bottlenecks, especially under high load or complex testing scenarios.
  • Dependency on Platform
    Excessive reliance on a specific platform for development environments might lead to challenges if a change in service or discontinuation occurs.

Category Popularity

0-100% (relative to Heroku CI and Runnable)
Developer Tools
61 61%
39% 39
Continuous Integration
100 100%
0% 0
Web Development Tools
0 0%
100% 100
Continuous Deployment
100 100%
0% 0

User comments

Share your experience with using Heroku CI and Runnable. For example, how are they different and which one is better?
Log in or Post with

What are some alternatives?

When comparing Heroku CI and Runnable, you can also consider the following products

Nevercode - Continuous integration & delivery for mobile apps made easy. Build, test & release native & cross-platform apps faster with Nevercode. Sign up for free.

Now + Github - Deploy your apps from GitHub pull requests as you push!

CircleCI - CircleCI gives web developers powerful Continuous Integration and Deployment with easy setup and maintenance.

RainforestQA - Insanely simple testing. Create tests for your website in plain English, then run them across all major browsers with a single click. Powered by human intelligence

Semaphore - Semaphore is a fully managed, high performance testing and deployment solution for your company. A Continuous Integration tool.

Valist - Automatically created staging environments for every update with a shareable link for testing