Puppetize everything or not?

stderr asked:

Notice: there is a lot of theoretical questions.

Recently I’m reading about Puppet (and similar systems), which – as I believe – can make my work easier, a lot. But I try – and unfortunately can’t – to understand what all I can “puppetize”. I can imagine “clouds” or HA clusters, where is the same config on more servers. But what about workstations? I have one pc (centos with kvm), one notebook (fedora) and personal server, can (or should) it be puppetized? What are (dis)advantages? Or in our company we have hundreds of servers (mainly with centos), but each of them is a little bit different. Can’t decide if it’s better to have a lot of configs on one place.. (Dis)advantages? I will be happy for all your opinions or links with this topic.

My answer:


PUPPET ALL THE THINGS

Anything that’s reasonably similar across all systems (or a subset of them), or that you can base a template off a fact you can get out of facter is fair game.

Things that are really unique you probably shouldn’t bother, and should just serve the configs out of a filebucket.

What falls into either category is a decision we can’t make without knowing your environment intimately, so that’s for you to figure out.


View the full question and answer on Server Fault.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.