Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ansible, puppet and chef

[Alan McKinnon]

On 17/09/2014 07:46, Hans de Graaff wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 22:43:18 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
>
>> Puppet seems to me a good product for a large site with 1000 hosts.
>> Not so much for ~20 or so. Plus puppet's language and configs get large
>> and hard to keep track of - lots and lots of directory trees with many
>> things mentioning other things. (Nagios has the same problem if you
>> start keeping host, services, groups and commands in many different
>> files)
>
> I'm using puppet for small installs (< 10 hosts) and am quite happy with
> it. It's wonderful to push some changes and have all these hosts
> configure themselves accordingly. Not to mention the joy of adding new
> hosts.

I want the benefits of puppet and the end result it brings about -
that's already established.

>
> The configuration can get large, but then again, these are all things
> that you are already managing on the host. Better to do it all in one
> place, rather than on each individual host with all its associated
> inconsistencies.
>
> Us being a ruby shop I never looked at ansible and I'm not even sure it
> existed when we choose puppet.

Ansible is somewhat new, and reading between the lines it might have
been written in response to large complex puppet installs.


> One thing you can do to make the deployment easier for smaller scale
> setups would be to use a masterless puppet. One less component to worry
> about. Just distribute the puppet repository and run puppet apply.


Well, I've already decided to not use puppet, I find it over-complex for
my needs (not to mind that the language has some confusing parts to it )


-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckinnon@×××××.com