Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Configuration Management - Finding the tool to fit your needs
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Configuration Management - Finding the tool to fit your needs

1,196
views

Published on

This presentation was originally given by Joseph Hall, SaltStack senior engineer, at the combined Montreal Python and DevOps Montreal meet up on April 14, 2014. Here is the talk abstract: In ye olde …

This presentation was originally given by Joseph Hall, SaltStack senior engineer, at the combined Montreal Python and DevOps Montreal meet up on April 14, 2014. Here is the talk abstract: In ye olde days of web, a company might manage a handful of servers, each manually and frequently tuned and re-tuned to the company's needs. Those days are gone. Server farms now dominate, and it is no longer reasonable to manage individual servers by hand. Various configuration management tools have stepped in to help the modern engineer, but which to choose? It is not an easy question, and canned pitches from sales people are unlikely to take into account all of your variables. This talk will attempt to discuss The Big Four objectively, and from what angles they approach the task at hand.

Published in: Software, Technology

0 Comments
5 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,196
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
42
Comments
0
Likes
5
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Configuration Management Finding the tool to fit your needs
  • 2. Disclosures and Caveats ● I’m biased (I work for SaltStack) ● Many of my views do not reflect SaltStack’s views ● I have only used Puppet and Salt ● All of the projects discussed are excellent, with talented teams behind them
  • 3. Timeline: CFEngine ● Mark Burgess, 1993 ● Designed for automated configuration and management of large-scale computer systems ● Configuration and usage seen by many to be arcane ● Currently in third iteration (CFEngine 3)
  • 4. Timeline: Puppet ● Luke Kanies, 2005 ● Unhappy with CFEngine 2, Luke built Puppet as a next-generation config management tool ● Designed to be easier to configure and use than CFEngine ● Uses a Ruby-like DSL
  • 5. Timeline: Chef ● Adam Jacobs, 2009 ● Adam was unhappy with Puppet’s non- deterministic (by default) ordering ● Uses a very Ruby-like DSL ● Designed to mix ops with development ● “Infrastructure as code.”
  • 6. Timeline: Salt ● Thomas Hatch, 2011 ● Originally designed for remote execution ● Config management added later ● Designed for speed, flexibility, ease of use, scale ● Based on data, not DSLs
  • 7. Timeline: Ansible ● Michael DeHaan, 2012 ● Requires no agents on the remote machine, except for sshd ● Designed for ad hoc task execution and config managment ● Designed with simplicity in mind
  • 8. Imperative vs Declarative ● Functional ● Do this, then this ● Chef ● Salt ● Ansible ● Object Oriented ● Do this and this, as you see fit ● Puppet ● Salt
  • 9. Domain Specific Languages ● Designed for specific tasks ● Not generally useful for other tasks DSL ● Chef ● Puppet ● Salt No DSL ● Salt ● Ansible
  • 10. Push vs Pull ● Server calls client ● Immediate remote execution ● Salt ● Ansible ● Client calls server ● Non-immediate remote execution ● Puppet ● Chef ● Salt
  • 11. ● Puppet ● Chef ● Salt ● Ansible ● Salt ● Ansible Immediate Remote Execution Config Management
  • 12. Remote Execution ● Use one machine to execute commands on another machine ● Config management is already a type of remote execution ● SSH (alone) is non-automated ● Queueing mechanisms are often used for remote execution
  • 13. Puppet Example package: { “httpd”: ensure => “installed”, } service: { “httpd”: ensure => “running”, enable => true, require => Package[“httpd”], subscribe => File[“httpd”], } file: { “httpd”: path => “/etc/httpd/conf/httpd.conf”, content => template(“httpd/httpd.conf.erb”), #/etc/puppetlabs/puppet/modules/httpd/templates/httpd.conf.erb, require => Package[“httpd”], }
  • 14. Chef Example package “httpd” template “httpd” do source “httpd.conf.erb” # stored in /templates/ in the current cookbook path “/etc/httpd/conf/httpd.conf” action :create end service “apache2” do action [:start, :enable] end
  • 15. Salt Example httpd: pkg: - install service: - running - enable: True - requires: - file: httpd file: - managed - name: /etc/httpd/conf/httpd.conf - source: salt://httpd/httpd.conf # stored in /srv/salt/httpd/httpd.conf - requires: - pkg: httpd
  • 16. Ansible Example - hosts: all tasks: - name: 1. Install Apache yum: name=httpd state=present - name: 2. Copy Apache Config template: src=httpd.conf.j2 dest=/etc/httpd/conf/httpd.conf - name: 3. Start Apache Service service: name=httpd state=running enabled=yes # httpd.conf is stored in the /templates/ directory for that role
  • 17. Which one is for me? ● It depends ○ Do you have legacy CM code? ○ Do you need immediate remote execution? ○ Are you planning to use this layer programmatically? ○ Is a hybrid solution more appropriate for you? ○ Which one feels right?