Re: Bulk updating dozens of (not identical) servers
On 28/01/2011, at 3:35 PM, Carlos A. Carnero Delgado wrote: > Hi there, > > the number of servers we have in my organization -- both physical and > virtual -- is slowly increasing at a steady pace, and the trend will > continue for the foreseeable future. It has come to the point that > apt-get upgrading && updating each one individually, and manually, is > really time consuming and prone to errors. We're looking into stuff > like Puppet and Cfengine, and it seems that either will do fine, but > we have this "feeling" or notion that they're a little bit heavyweight > for our needs. Not to mention the learning curve. > > So, in the context of *only* dealing with installed packages updates > in an automated way[1] and having 8.04 and 10.04 LTS releases in > service, do you guys recommend anything? Did you write custom code? > Has anyone seen Fabric in the context of systems administration? +1 for the Puppet (or any other configuration management system you feel more comfortable with). I've used bconfig at a previous place and managed several hundred servers with vastly differing configurations. Admittedly, within that corpus of servers, there was a modicum of commonality between classes of servers; such as all the MySQL servers, all the mail servers, all the file servers, etc. As Clint Byrum has mentioned, a configuration management system is a great asset with flow-on benefits too. A little pain initially for a LOT of gain in the long term. Cheers, James smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature -- ubuntu-server mailing list ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
Re: Bulk updating dozens of (not identical) servers
I have used Capistrano. It is a ruby gem that enables concurrent commands to be executed across any number of servers using SSH. More info can be found here: https://github.com/capistrano/capistrano/wiki On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 10:35 PM, Carlos A. Carnero Delgado < carloscarn...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi there, > > the number of servers we have in my organization -- both physical and > virtual -- is slowly increasing at a steady pace, and the trend will > continue for the foreseeable future. It has come to the point that > apt-get upgrading && updating each one individually, and manually, is > really time consuming and prone to errors. We're looking into stuff > like Puppet and Cfengine, and it seems that either will do fine, but > we have this "feeling" or notion that they're a little bit heavyweight > for our needs. Not to mention the learning curve. > > So, in the context of *only* dealing with installed packages updates > in an automated way[1] and having 8.04 and 10.04 LTS releases in > service, do you guys recommend anything? Did you write custom code? > Has anyone seen Fabric in the context of systems administration? > > [1] Please note that automated here really means "bulk updating" started > from a command (or thingie) given by an administrator. It should not > be interpreted as autonomously contacting repos. > > Thanks in advance, > Carlos. > > -- > ubuntu-server mailing list > ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server > More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam > -- ubuntu-server mailing list ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
Re: Bulk updating dozens of (not identical) servers
On Thu, 2011-01-27 at 23:35 -0500, Carlos A. Carnero Delgado wrote: > Hi there, > > the number of servers we have in my organization -- both physical and > virtual -- is slowly increasing at a steady pace, and the trend will > continue for the foreseeable future. It has come to the point that > apt-get upgrading && updating each one individually, and manually, is > really time consuming and prone to errors. We're looking into stuff > like Puppet and Cfengine, and it seems that either will do fine, but > we have this "feeling" or notion that they're a little bit heavyweight > for our needs. Not to mention the learning curve. > Puppet can actually be incredibly lightweight. Whether you choose puppet, cfengine, chef, or another, any configuration management system will have a lot of residual benefits. Its hard to recommend that you avoid these, when you don't *have* to take them on to make puppet useful for what you're doing now. Think about how hard it is to repeat what you did on server A, when somebody wants A+something slightly different. What about all those standard things you do on every install, like add admin users, or setup ldap auth. When you use a config management system.. that stuff is easy and maintainable. Add in version control, and now you can actually figure out what you did to break stuff. :) > So, in the context of *only* dealing with installed packages updates > in an automated way[1] and having 8.04 and 10.04 LTS releases in > service, do you guys recommend anything? Did you write custom code? > Has anyone seen Fabric in the context of systems administration? > One cool thing is that with puppet you can make sure the packages get configured automatically as well: http://projects.puppetlabs.com/projects/1/wiki/Debian_Preseed_Patterns Anyway, puppet has also recently added mcollective, which makes it easy to do things in a highly scalable way accross many servers intelligently. I think Chef has something to do that already as well. -- ubuntu-server mailing list ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
Bulk updating dozens of (not identical) servers
Hi there, the number of servers we have in my organization -- both physical and virtual -- is slowly increasing at a steady pace, and the trend will continue for the foreseeable future. It has come to the point that apt-get upgrading && updating each one individually, and manually, is really time consuming and prone to errors. We're looking into stuff like Puppet and Cfengine, and it seems that either will do fine, but we have this "feeling" or notion that they're a little bit heavyweight for our needs. Not to mention the learning curve. So, in the context of *only* dealing with installed packages updates in an automated way[1] and having 8.04 and 10.04 LTS releases in service, do you guys recommend anything? Did you write custom code? Has anyone seen Fabric in the context of systems administration? [1] Please note that automated here really means "bulk updating" started from a command (or thingie) given by an administrator. It should not be interpreted as autonomously contacting repos. Thanks in advance, Carlos. -- ubuntu-server mailing list ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
Re: facter and KVM
On 2011-01-27 15:51, Clint Byrum wrote: > Give yourself some credit, you were able to identify that its a problem > and file a cogent bug report. No, I meant I'm an idiot because I didn't see that it was fixed already. But in my defense, I checked the changelog on LP (https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/facter/+changelog), and the entry for the Debian version which included the fix (1.5.7-2) does not appear there. Is that intended this way? > I just looked, and you did the right thing and marked it as Fix > Released, though it would be good to also mention in the comments the > changelog line that leads you to believe that. Ok, will add that later when I do all the other paper work. > I went ahead and nominated the bug for Lucid. You'll want to add the SRU > justification to the bug description next. Also does this affect > Maverick as well? Sounds like yes. Thanks. Yes, maverick has 1.5.7-1, so it is affected as well. -- ubuntu-server mailing list ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
Re: facter and KVM
On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 21:21 +0100, Oliver Brakmann wrote: > On 2011-01-26 18:33, Dustin Kirkland wrote: > > I'd agree too. Please make sure you file a bug and follow the rest of > > those procedures described in that SRU wiki document, and this should > > go painlessly. > > D'uh, I'm an idiot. > Give yourself some credit, you were able to identify that its a problem and file a cogent bug report. > I filed the bug now (it's #708080), and subsequently began setting up > all the bzr stuff the SRU wiki page talks about. When I checked out the > latest facter package, I saw that the bug has already been fixed in > Debian, and merged into the latest package which is now in Natty. > I just looked, and you did the right thing and marked it as Fix Released, though it would be good to also mention in the comments the changelog line that leads you to believe that. > I'll try the SRU stuff, but I've never done that before, and I'm > clueless, so bear with me ;-p > > I went ahead and nominated the bug for Lucid. You'll want to add the SRU justification to the bug description next. Also does this affect Maverick as well? Sounds like yes. -- ubuntu-server mailing list ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
