[LRUG] Idempotency vs the cloud

[David Salgado]

On 19 July 2013 16:47, Simon Coffey <simon at tribesports.com> wrote:

> > tl;dr: If you don't care about running your recipes/manifests/whatever
> repeatedly, do Chef and Puppet still add enough value to justify their
> complexity?
>
> Yes (in the sense that I've had a net benefit), and for me most of
> that value has come from the composability of recipes and roles, and
> the flexibility it gives you when it comes to building new
> environments.


What he said.

Plus, for me at least, it's incredibly useful to have a reasonably
sanely-structured description of what different servers are supposed to be
doing, and the bits and pieces they need in order to do it.

Quite often, servers will need something that's not obviously part of their
job. e.g. my database servers need ruby and gems that let them talk to
Amazon S3, because that's where they put their backups. If I'm working on a
bit of my infrastructure that hasn't been touched in a while, it's *really*
helpful to have an accurate description of the state.

OK, a simpler DSL could potentially do that too, but Puppet/Chef are a
solution I can implement right now.

David
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lrug.org/pipermail/chat-lrug.org/attachments/20130719/bba4293d/attachment-0003.html>