Running a rather small cluster, and just swtched from puppet to salt - mostly because it is written in python, and I'm more comfortable with that. Haven't used neither puppet nor salt much, but both satisfies my rather basic needs.
/jon Tim Cutts <[email protected]> skrev: > >On 6 Jan 2013, at 18:55, Skylar Thompson <[email protected]> >wrote: > >> CFengine probably isn't a bad choice - going with something that's >> well-tested and -used is helpful because it's a lot easier to get >> recipes for what you need to do. > >We use cfengine2 and cfengine3 here; still in the middle of migrating >from one to the other. We also evaluated puppet, at the time we were >deciding whether to move to cfengine3. Puppet vs. cfengine is very >much another emacs vs. vi religious debate. There are strengths and >weaknesses to both, I think. Puppet's manifest syntax is higher level >and somewhat easier to get to grips with when you start, but anything >more sophisticated and you have to start writing extensions in Ruby, >and that language is one of my pet hates. One thing some people may >object to, which may or may not be because it's written in ruby, is the >amount of RAM puppet uses while running. Some might consider that to >be unacceptably disruptive, depending on the size of your nodes and how >fully utilised the RAM normally is. CFengine's terminology is >confusing. Promisers and promisees; unnecessary terminology which just >obfuscates things. And easily typo'd one for the other as well. But >it does work, a >nd it's relatively lightweight. The commercial pricing, if you want >the extra features that brings, is extremely expensive. But I agree >with Skylar, CFengine is well-established, and there's a lot of >expertise out there. Increasingly, that's true of the others as well, >though. > >> The one on the list I can absolutely >> recommend against is Spacewalk - we use RHN Satellite (the commercial >> version of Spacewalk) and it is easily the worst configuration >> management system I have ever seen. > >We use another commercial version of Spacewalk, SuSE Manager, to manage >patch levels on our SLES boxes. We don't use it for any other distros, >and not for configuration management other than patch levels. It's not >very pleasant to use, I agree - Fixing bugs in its scripts just to get >it to install, and then fighting with Novell's hideous licensing model >for it, took months. Not pleasant. > >For Debian and Ubuntu we use FAI for deployment, which works pretty >nicely. Obviously both cfengine and FAI config setups are under >version control. > >Tim -- Skickat från min Android-telefon med K-9 E-post. Ursäkta min fåordighet. _______________________________________________ Beowulf mailing list, [email protected] sponsored by Penguin Computing To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
