Does anyone have experience with puppet from URL:
https://puppetlabs.com/
?
If so, positive and/or negative observations are requested, as well as
practical alternatives.
Yasha Karant
pro - powerful and well-supported
con - you have to learn a new syntax
alternative - bcfg2
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Yasha Karant wrote:
> Does anyone have experience with puppet from URL:
>
> https://puppetlabs.com/
>
> ?
>
> If so, positive and/or negative obser
Large puppet community at Fermilab--I started using it a few months ago
and have been able to get productive and do a lot of things with it
very quickly. Many of its config files are written in a Ruby-like syntax
so Ruby training pays off with faster learning time.
Steve Timm
On Thu, 21 Feb
We're just spinning up Puppet with The Foreman frontend, and it looks quite
powerful and useful. It's beneficial in that the FLOSS version also has well
behaved Windows clients...
--
James Pulver
LEPP Computer Group
Cornell University
-Original Message-
From: owner-scientifi
2013/2/21 Yasha Karant
> Does anyone have experience with puppet from URL:
> https://puppetlabs.com/
> ?
> If so, positive and/or negative observations are requested, as well as
> practical alternatives.
> [...]
>
I use puppet since round about three years with round about
CERN are also using puppet as part of our tools transformation to replace
Quattor (Ben Jones's video from last PuppetConf at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehVMxbJdld8 and the CHEP paper at
http://cern.ch/go/N8wp)
Our configurations are at https://github.com/cernops. We're al
We (another group at Fermilab) have used Puppet for a couple of years now
to manage a few thousand systems, with good results. As Steve and Jamie
both noted, it's essentially a new language to learn, though a fairly
simple and well-behaved one. There are many user-contributed mo
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 02:27:07PM -0500, Jamie Duncan wrote:
> pro - powerful and well-supported
> con - you have to learn a new syntax
>
> alternative - bcfg2
Also cfengine, though that seems to be getting less fashionable... We
still use it, no compelling reasons to change so far!
G.
--
Many in the VFX industry use it as well.
Pretty solid.
Was using CacheFS in Irix many moons ago and then various manually maintained
kick starts/rysncs but all in all, Puppet is pretty shweet.
- aurf
On Feb 21, 2013, at 12:38 PM, Graham Allan wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 02:27:0
We use it for our Scientific Linux systems at IoraHealth.
We use Puppet in its "standalone" mode so we don't need the added
infrastructure for a Puppet Master -- something like the strategy here:
http://bitfieldconsulting.com/scaling-puppet-with-distributed-version-control
(A
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Yasha Karant wrote:
> Does anyone have experience with puppet from URL:
>
> https://puppetlabs.com/
>
> ?
>
> If so, positive and/or negative observations are requested, as well as
> practical alternatives.
>
> Yasha Karant
Switching
On 02/21/2013 12:23 PM, Yasha Karant wrote:
Does anyone have experience with puppet from URL:
https://puppetlabs.com/
?
If so, positive and/or negative observations are requested, as well as
practical alternatives.
Yasha Karant
We've been using it for a while and have been fairly
what a start of the year for ruby it was), and it has in
place editing instead of requiring you to use yet another tool
(augeas).
But puppet/chef are good products too, just not good enough to justify
a downgrade from the better one ;-)
--
natxo
.
Cfengine is just fine. Good performance, little dependencies, good
security record (not unimportant for your infrastructure management
tool and oh what a start of the year for ruby it was), and it has in
place editing instead of requiring you to use yet another tool
(augeas).
But puppet/chef are
just fine. Good performance, little dependencies, good
security record (not unimportant for your infrastructure management
tool and oh what a start of the year for ruby it was), and it has in
place editing instead of requiring you to use yet another tool
(augeas).
But puppet/chef are good products
The only problem I ever had with cfengine is the documentation was
never all that great but it is stable and scales well.
That being said puppet is not perfect many of the stock recipes for it
you find on the web don't scale well and to get it to scale you really
need to be a ruby programe
We too used to use components written in perl under a distributed
environment. As this is a new installation, and as we need to find a
more maintainable and scalable solution, I posed the query for comments
from those with actual field experience.
The fact that puppet does not seem to scale
I'm not sure where the statement that Puppet does not scale well comes
from...
You do need to have enough puppet masters and architect it according to the
best practises but the books tell you how to do this.
Tim
> -Original Message-
> From: owner-scientif
2013/2/22 Yasha Karant
> [...]
> The fact that puppet does not seem to scale well is bothersome -- ruby is
> no problem as various members of the group have (some) fluency in many
> languages, including ruby, perl, python, java, and the incarnations of sh
> (sh, bash, ksh, etc.
m
> those with actual field experience.
>
> The fact that puppet does not seem to scale well is bothersome -- ruby is no
> problem as various members of the group have (some) fluency in many
> languages, including ruby, perl, python, java, and the incarnations of sh
> (sh, bash, ksh, et
If you have temporary staff, they would also be interested in having Puppet
skills on their CVs this is from job adverts trends on indeed.com asking
for particular skills in open posts.
> -Original Message-
> From: owner-scientific-linux-us...@listserv.fn
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 11:39:58AM -0500, Paul Robert Marino wrote:
> The only problem I ever had with cfengine is the documentation was
> never all that great but it is stable and scales well.
> That being said puppet is not perfect many of the stock recipes for it
> you find on t
The reason I settled on puppet was Windows support. I really prefer tools with
support for Windows, Linux and Mac, and CFEngine was hugely expensive for the
native windows agent. Puppet is free... Would I prefer scheduling for
changes... yes. That said, it seems like it would be simple enough
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 7:04 PM, Tim Bell wrote:
> ** **
>
> If you have temporary staff, they would also be interested in having
> Puppet skills on their CVs this is from job adverts trends on
> indeed.com asking for particular skills in open posts.
>
> **
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 6:54 PM, Tim Bell wrote:
>
> I'm not sure where the statement that Puppet does not scale well comes
> from...
it is pretty well documented by Jarle Bjørgeengen for ;login (usenix):
https://www.usenix.org/publications/login/february-2010-volume-35-numbe
o configuration management, the
tool choice is secondary and different sites will have different needs.
Tim
> -Original Message-
> From: Natxo Asenjo [mailto:natxo.ase...@gmail.com]
> Sent: 22 February 2013 23:18
> To: Tim Bell
> Cc: Yasha Karant; SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@
hem in 3rdparty repositories, especially loo,
in Fedora for backporting, or to use tools like "cpan2rpm" or
"cpanspec" to build RPM's for them which you can deploy in an internal
yum repository or for direct installation via cfengine or puppet.
similar techniques work well fo
a for backporting, or to use tools like "cpan2rpm" or
> "cpanspec" to build RPM's for them which you can deploy in an internal
> yum repository or for direct installation via cfengine or puppet.
> similar techniques work well for PHP and Ruby modules as well.
>
&
tools like "cpan2rpm" or
>> "cpanspec" to build RPM's for them which you can deploy in an internal
>> yum repository or for direct installation via cfengine or puppet.
>> similar techniques work well for PHP and Ruby modules as well.
>>
>&
use tools like "cpan2rpm" or
>> "cpanspec" to build RPM's for them which you can deploy in an internal
>> yum repository or for direct installation via cfengine or puppet.
>> similar techniques work well for PHP and Ruby modules as well.
>>
>> I act
modules, it's
>>> often possible to find them in 3rdparty repositories, especially loo,
>>> in Fedora for backporting, or to use tools like "cpan2rpm" or
>>> "cpanspec" to build RPM's for them which you can deploy in an internal
>>>
31 matches
Mail list logo
