Best.....Post.....Ever On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Christopher Wood <christopher_w...@pobox.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 04:34:34PM -0700, Stuart Cracraft wrote: >> Hey, Chris: so that begs the question, do you think you have some "secret" >> or are just >> happier with fewer flashy gui's, more install/deployment scripts, and so >> forth. > > No actual secret. I'm happier with the command line and text configuration > files (though a GUI absolutely has its place). I prefer interpreted (or > shell) based installers so that I can tell what's going on, or going wrong. > Of course, this may have as much to do with how my mind works as the amount > of practice I've had in different computing ecosystems (because, again, $0 > budget). Just because these things are good for me doesn't automatically mean > they're good for other people with other talents. > >> In other words, do you think the scaling of Open Puppet is adequate to >> scale much larger >> without the flash? > > Yes, I do. > >> Or, is there something fundamentally holding back Open Puppet from >> handling >> thousands, tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands of nodes, in your >> opinion? > > But then, it's not just puppet that people are scaling. If somebody thinks > that they're going to point 100k nodes at a single virtual machine running > puppet and have everything work at 99.999% uptime, they're making a mistake. > (The same mistake that we've all seen for mail, radius, dns, et cetera.) Even > if that works, are they willing to lose a cluster's configuration management > if a single VM goes down? So now we have multiple puppet servers. Unix-like > directories get slow when we add hundreds of thousands of directory entries. > Let's stop tossing our node definitions in a single directory. How do we keep > the certificates in sync? Now we have a system to sync certs. Can our > switches handle the load of all that network traffic? Let's make sure we have > redundant switches in our network core. Do we really want every server to > depend on one set of puppetmasters? Let's break things out into pods. Can't > keep the pods in sync? Maybe centralized is the way to go. Your whole > datacentre checks into the puppetmaster at the same time every hour? It's > time to spread thousands of requests out over the 3600 seconds you have in > each hour, or add more backend puppetmasters or check in less often. There's > a ton more of these scaling items. > > In short: scaling puppet is about more than puppet. The puppet component is > ready to compile a catalog from your manifests and send it to the node, yes. > Every other layer has to be ready to scale up in support of that goal. > >> Cheers, >> Stuart >> On Wednesday, July 25, 2012 2:52:00 PM UTC-7, Christopher Wood wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 02:20:17PM -0700, Hai Tao wrote: >> > I see. so it is on purpose to make it not easy to use so the >> > enterprise can be sold? :) >> >> There are different skill levels at different tasks in the enterprise >> space, and it is legitimate that some organizations are better off with >> a prefabbed installer for a configuration management system. >> >> I've created a puppet installation of reasonable complexity without >> puppet enterprise, but that is possibly just me: >> >> $ cd files/puppet/svn/prod/trunk >> $ ls manifests/nodes | wc -l >> 43 >> $ find modules -name "*pp" | wc -l >> 174 >> >> That's not to say I don't salivate a bit at the thought of Puppet >> Enterprise, but my budget of $0 doesn't help there. Or perhaps a >> career-long $0 budget has helped, in that I'm more used to building from >> components instead of buying the package. People who are more used to >> buying than building may be better off with a different situation than >> mine. >> >> > On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Christopher Wood >> > <[1]christopher_w...@pobox.com> wrote: >> > > Sounds like you should be talking to your managers about buying >> Puppet Enterprise. >> > > >> > > On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 02:00:37PM -0700, Hai Tao wrote: >> > >> Hi, >> > >> >> > >> I notice that many components of puppet do not scale well and are >> not >> > >> intended for large environment. For example, stored config and >> > >> inventory service. In order to scale, we need to use puppetDB, >> right? >> > >> Another example is the webrick, and which should be replaced by a >> > >> decent web server such as apache. All these need a lot of new >> > >> installation of pieces of software and configurations. >> > >> >> > >> My question is why the designer of puppet did not consider this and >> > >> integrate everything into a complete solution at the beginning, >> rather >> > >> than having us have to reconfigure everything by hand. Who will use >> > >> puppet if he has only 50 nodes? >> > >> >> > >> -- >> > >> Hai Tao >> > >> >> > >> -- >> > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "Puppet Users" group. >> > >> To post to this group, send email to >> [2]puppet-users@googlegroups.com. >> > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [3]puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> > >> For more options, visit this group at >> [4]http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en. >> > >> >> > >> >> > > >> > > -- >> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "Puppet Users" group. >> > > To post to this group, send email to >> [5]puppet-users@googlegroups.com. >> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [6]puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> > > For more options, visit this group at >> [7]http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en. >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Hai Tao >> > >> > -- >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "Puppet Users" group. >> > To post to this group, send email to [8]puppet-users@googlegroups.com. >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [9]puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> > For more options, visit this group at >> [10]http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en. >> > >> > >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Puppet Users" group. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> [11]https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/MW0Ok3Eent8J. >> To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en. >> >> References >> >> Visible links >> 1. mailto:christopher_w...@pobox.com >> 2. mailto:puppet-users@googlegroups.com >> 3. mailto:puppet-users%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com >> 4. http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en >> 5. mailto:puppet-users@googlegroups.com >> 6. mailto:puppet-users%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com >> 7. http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en >> 8. mailto:puppet-users@googlegroups.com >> 9. mailto:puppet-users%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com >> 10. http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en >> 11. https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/MW0Ok3Eent8J > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Puppet Users" group. > To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en. >
-- Trevor Vaughan Vice President, Onyx Point, Inc (410) 541-6699 tvaug...@onyxpoint.com -- This account not approved for unencrypted proprietary information -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
