[chef] Re: Re: Re: Re: Feelings on chef

[Lee Azzarello < >]

On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Mike Bailey 
<
 >
 wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:22 PM, Marcus Bointon 
> <
 >
> wrote:
>>
>> On 4 May 2010, at 14:59, Lee Azzarello wrote:
>>
>> > As someone who has an installation with more than 10 nodes and a full
>> > chef-server, it scales pretty good so the complexity paid off.
>>
>> I meant that sufficient performance to support say, 100 nodes, could
>> probably be achieved using flat text files.
>
> I'm still excited about the Chef project but after spending more time with
> it I'm a little concerned about the complexity of chef as a configuration
> management system.
> I currently generate my configuration files using scripts/templates and keep
> them in git. It's pretty simple. Even if my git server goes away I can
> restore from a backup. It's just text.

I totally agree. Chef can do configuration management but that's just
one of the features of a full client-server managed network. If all
you need is configuration management I would recommend chef-solo or
another framework entirely. One of the philosophical differences
between Chef and Puppet is that Chef has more dependencies by design
because it has more features. These features are there to automate
your infrastructure, which happens to require configuration
management.

-- 
_______________
Lee Azzarello
drop.io staff hacker