Blog

Docker Compose vs Kubernetes: A Practical Decision Guide for Software Distribution

Louis Weston • Co-Founder

A practical guide to choosing between Docker Compose and Kubernetes for software distribution.

5 Copy URL

November 17, 2025

Docker Compose vs Kubernetes: A Practical Decision Guide for Software Distribution

Here’s what typically happens: You close your first enterprise deal. They want to run your software on-premise. You scramble to containerize everything, and then face the inevitable question: “Should we use Docker Compose or Kubernetes?”

The wrong choice here doesn’t just impact your engineering team—it affects your sales velocity, support burden, and ultimately, your ability to scale.

This guide helps you make the right decision based on real-world distribution scenarios.

TL;DR: The 80/20 Rule

Start with Docker Compose if:

• You have fewer than 20 customers
• Your application runs on 1-5 containers
• Your customers have mixed technical capabilities
• You need to ship something this week

Start with Kubernetes if:

• You’re selling exclusively to enterprises with platform teams
• Your application requires complex orchestration
• You have dedicated DevOps resources
• Your customers demand “cloud-native” architecture

Support both if:

• You’re serving diverse market segments
• You’re scaling from SMB to enterprise
• You want maximum market reach

Understanding Your Actual Constraints

The Customer Reality Spectrum

Your customers fall somewhere on this spectrum:

“Just Make It Work” Customers

• Single VM or bare metal server
• No Kubernetes experience
• Want simple commands
• IT generalists, not specialists
• Best served by: Docker Compose

“We Have Preferences” Customers

• Some container experience
• May have Docker Swarm
• Can follow documentation
• Small DevOps team
• Best served by: Docker Compose with migration path

“Enterprise Architecture” Customers

• Existing Kubernetes clusters
• Platform engineering teams
• Expect Helm charts
• Formal deployment processes
• Best served by: Kubernetes/Helm

The Complexity Calculator

Count how many of these apply to your application:

Docker Compose Indicators (1 point each):

• Runs on 5 or fewer containers
• Single database dependency
• No complex service mesh requirements
• Stateful services with simple persistence needs
• Fixed scaling requirements

Kubernetes Indicators (1 point each):

• Auto-scaling requirements
• Complex service discovery
• Multiple environment configurations
• Rolling updates critical
• Multi-node requirements from day one

Score 3+ Docker Compose points: Start there

Score 3+ Kubernetes points: Consider starting with Kubernetes

Mixed score: Support both

Docker Compose: The Underestimated Option

When It’s Actually the Better Choice

1. Proof of Concept Speed

Docker Compose gets you from zero to deployed in hours. A simple docker-compose.yml file can:

• Define your entire stack
• Handle networking automatically
• Manage volumes and persistence
• Provide adequate orchestration for most applications

2. Debugging and Support

When customers have issues, Docker Compose debugging is straightforward:

docker compose logs
docker compose ps
docker exec -it container_name bash

Compare this to Kubernetes debugging:

kubectl get pods --all-namespaces
kubectl describe pod pod-name
kubectl logs pod-name -c container-name
kubectl exec -it pod-name -c container-name -- bash

Your support team will thank you.

3. Resource Efficiency

Docker Compose overhead: ~50MB

Kubernetes overhead: ~2GB minimum

For applications under 10GB, Kubernetes overhead can exceed your actual application footprint.

Docker Compose Distribution Architecture

version: '3.8'

services:
  app:
    image: registry.distr.sh/yourcompany/app:${VERSION:-latest}
    environment:
      - DATABASE_URL=${DATABASE_URL}
      - LICENSE_KEY=${LICENSE_KEY}
    ports:
      - '80:8080'
    volumes:
      - app_data:/data
    restart: unless-stopped

  postgres:
    image: postgres:14
    environment:
      - POSTGRES_PASSWORD=${DB_PASSWORD}
    volumes:
      - postgres_data:/var/lib/postgresql/data

volumes:
  app_data:
  postgres_data:

This simple structure handles 80% of distribution use cases.

Scaling Docker Compose

Docker Compose doesn’t mean you’re limited to single nodes. Progressive scaling options:

1. Single Node: Standard Docker Compose
2. High Availability: Docker Compose with external load balancer
3. Multi-Node: Docker Swarm mode (minimal changes required)
4. Migration Path: Convert to Kubernetes when needed

Kubernetes: When Complexity Pays Off

When It’s Worth the Investment

1. Multi-Tenancy Requirements

If customers run multiple instances of your application with different configurations, Kubernetes namespaces and RBAC provide proper isolation.

2. Complex Orchestration Needs

• Service mesh requirements (Istio, Linkerd)
• Complex deployment strategies (canary, blue-green)
• Auto-scaling based on custom metrics
• Cross-region deployments

3. Enterprise Expectations

Some enterprises mandate Kubernetes. They have:

• Existing clusters
• Platform teams
• Helm chart expectations
• GitOps workflows

Kubernetes Distribution Architecture

apiVersion: apps/v1
kind: Deployment
metadata:
  name: {{ .Release.Name }}
spec:
  replicas: {{ .Values.replicas }}
  template:
    spec:
      containers:
      - name: app
        image: {{ .Values.image.repository }}:{{ .Values.image.tag }}
        env:
        - name: DATABASE_URL
          valueFrom:
            secretKeyRef:
              name: {{ .Release.Name }}-secrets
              key: database-url

More complex, but enables sophisticated deployment patterns.

The Hybrid Approach: Supporting Both

Why This Often Makes Sense

The most successful distribution strategies often support both:

Docker Compose for:

• Proof of concepts
• Small deployments
• Resource-constrained environments
• Quick starts

Kubernetes for:

• Production deployments
• Scaled environments
• Enterprise customers
• Cloud-native requirements

Implementation Strategy

1. Start with Docker Compose
   • Faster initial development
   • Simpler testing
   • Quick customer validation
2. Extract configuration patterns
   • Identify common environment variables
   • Standardize volume mounts
   • Document networking requirements
3. Create Helm charts that mirror Docker Compose structure
   • Same environment variables
   • Similar service names
   • Compatible networking
4. Maintain parity
   • Test both deployment methods
   • Keep documentation synchronized
   • Ensure feature compatibility

Real-World Migration Paths

Path 1: Docker Compose → Docker Swarm → Kubernetes

Timeline: 6-12 months

Stage 1: Docker Compose (Months 1-3)

• Single node deployments
• Basic orchestration
• Manual scaling

Stage 2: Docker Swarm (Months 4-8)

• Multi-node support
• Automatic failover
• Service discovery

Stage 3: Kubernetes (Months 9-12)

• Full orchestration
• Enterprise features
• Complex deployments

Path 2: Parallel Support from Day One

Timeline: 2-3 months initial, ongoing maintenance

Advantages:

• Serve all customer segments immediately
• No migration required
• Learn from both deployment types

Challenges:

• Dual maintenance burden
• Testing complexity
• Documentation overhead

Distribution Platform Considerations

Using Distr

Distr’s native support for both Docker Compose and Kubernetes means:

• Single platform for both deployment types
• Consistent licensing across deployment methods
• Unified customer portal
• Same agent architecture

Using Kubernetes-Only Platforms

Platforms that only support Kubernetes force you to:

• Convert Docker Compose to Helm charts
• Potentially lose simple deployment options
• Require Kubernetes knowledge from all customers
• Deploy embedded Kubernetes for non-native environments

Decision Framework

For Startups (Seed to Series A)

Recommend: Docker Compose

Focus on proving value quickly. You can always add Kubernetes later, but you can’t get back the months spent on premature Kubernetes adoption.

For Scale-ups (Series B+)

Recommend: Both

You have resources to support both and need to serve diverse customer segments. Start new customers on Docker Compose, offer Kubernetes for enterprise deals.

For Enterprise-Focused Vendors

Recommend: Kubernetes-First

If you’re selling $100k+ deals exclusively to Global 2000 companies, they expect Kubernetes. Invest in making it excellent.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

Docker Compose Mistakes

1. No resource limits - Always set memory and CPU limits
2. Hardcoded configurations - Use environment variables
3. Missing health checks - Add them for automated recovery
4. No backup strategy - Document volume backup procedures

Kubernetes Mistakes

1. Over-engineering - Start with simple deployments
2. Ignoring RBAC - Security matters in enterprise environments
3. Complex Helm charts - Keep them maintainable
4. No resource requests/limits - Prevents cluster stability issues

Practical Next Steps

If You Choose Docker Compose:

1. Create a reference docker-compose.yml
2. Document environment variables
3. Test on different Docker versions
4. Plan for eventual scaling needs
5. Build monitoring and logging strategy

If You Choose Kubernetes:

1. Start with basic Helm charts
2. Test on different Kubernetes versions
3. Document minimum cluster requirements
4. Create pre-flight check scripts
5. Build kubectl-free management tools

If You Choose Both:

1. Maintain configuration parity
2. Automate testing for both
3. Create clear customer guidance
4. Plan resource allocation
5. Document migration paths

Conclusion: Start Simple, Scale Smart

The Docker Compose vs Kubernetes decision isn’t about which technology is “better”—it’s about matching your distribution strategy to your market reality.

Most successful software vendors start with Docker Compose because it:

• Ships faster
• Supports broader customer base
• Reduces support burden
• Enables quick iteration

Then they add Kubernetes support when:

• Enterprise customers demand it
• Applications require complex orchestration
• Engineering resources allow dual support
• Market positioning requires “cloud-native” credibility

The key is maintaining flexibility. Choose a distribution platform that supports both approaches, allowing you to serve customers wherever they are on the technical maturity spectrum.

Remember: Your customers care about solving their problems, not your architectural choices. Pick the deployment method that gets them to value fastest, then evolve as needed.

Want to learn more?

Download White Paper Book Demo