On 11/04/2009 02:18 PM, Marcus Moeller wrote: > We had massive performance issues with Puppet< 0.25 and Mogrel/Webrick.
Right, I dont think that the default out of the box setup with Webrick is meant to scale much beyond 100 or so machines, but its trivial to setup nginx based proxy in front of multiple mongrels and have that handle the load. Anything > 500 nodes needs specific consideration, but then at that level you have both the time and the interest to fix the specific issues. > Concerning Ruby you should at least be familiar with quoting/escaping > and scopes. I think the puppet DSL is slightly different from ruby in that way. Just working with the language guide for puppet is enough to keep things going. Its only when you get down to lower level embedded templates with erb that it might help knowing a bit of ruby, but I do honestly think most people can do almost everything on puppet without any ruby experience. > There are not so may packages that needs to be installed on client > side (about 10) How about the server side? puppet is still a single package on that end too. > but in conclusion you will get functionalities like > remote-commands through osad and monitoring. The package upgrades > could be handled with errata and update management easily. with puppet you get the ability to carry role based nagios definitions in sync with the role definition - which almost means zero nagios configuration. So what that means is that when I define what my webserver-type1 should look like and what configs its needs and what policy it needs to implement I can also define, at the same place, what sort of monitoring would be needed against those components. Then when I apply webserver-type1 to any specific machine, I get the nagios configs for free. And the fact that puppet runs in a definite manner, it can make for a reactive monitoring system in itself ( although I prefer to use tools like monit / god for that - specially for time critical services ). >> PS: Your email client is broken. Its not preserving thread sanity. > Not a problem here. Interestingly for your email : Message-ID: <g1m1yig5etitfc1rxzjezwjv4x.pena...@mail.gmail.com> The headers contain no References or in-reply-to headers on the copy that came through to me ( your most recent one does have References set ). So not sure what mailclient you are using, but its a bit random on its headers. - KB -- Karanbir Singh London, UK | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh ICQ: 2522219 | Yahoo IM: z00dax | Gtalk: z00dax GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
