FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > CentOS > CentOS

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 07-21-2011, 03:36 PM
Devin Reade
 
Default managing a rack full of centos servers

--On Wednesday, July 20, 2011 11:02:42 PM -0700 RC <cooleyr@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 10:07:06 -0600 Devin Reade <gdr@gno.org> wrote:

>> It should be considered as complementing the automated config
>> management tools like cfengine et al, not as a replacement for
>> them (they're doing different jobs).
>
> That's not entirely fair. A little shell scripting and pdsh and pdcp
> can certainly do everything cfengine/puppet can do

I wasn't referring to pdsh/pdcp; I was referring to pconsole. The
reason I said complementing is that sometimes it is good to have
stuff under a configuration management system like cfengine/puppet,
but sometimes you need to run ad-hoc commands, in an identical
fashion, on lots of similar machines, which pconsole is good at
(subject to the caveats I previously mentioned).

I made no comments on pdsh/pdcp at all, and make no claims on where
it fits in the spectrum.

Devin

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 07-21-2011, 10:19 PM
Marian Marinov
 
Default managing a rack full of centos servers

On Thursday 21 July 2011 18:36:17 Devin Reade wrote:
> --On Wednesday, July 20, 2011 11:02:42 PM -0700 RC <cooleyr@gmail.com>
>
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 10:07:06 -0600 Devin Reade <gdr@gno.org> wrote:
> >> It should be considered as complementing the automated config
> >> management tools like cfengine et al, not as a replacement for
> >> them (they're doing different jobs).
> >
> > That's not entirely fair. A little shell scripting and pdsh and pdcp
> > can certainly do everything cfengine/puppet can do
>
> I wasn't referring to pdsh/pdcp; I was referring to pconsole. The
> reason I said complementing is that sometimes it is good to have
> stuff under a configuration management system like cfengine/puppet,
> but sometimes you need to run ad-hoc commands, in an identical
> fashion, on lots of similar machines, which pconsole is good at
> (subject to the caveats I previously mentioned).
>
> I made no comments on pdsh/pdcp at all, and make no claims on where
> it fits in the spectrum.
>
> Devin
>
You can actually achieve the same functionality of pdsh/pdcp and pconsole with
a quite simple bash script

http://multy-command.sourceforge.net/

I think it is a matter of what the admin will prefer to do. When you have a
lot of identical machines, sometimes it is better to have cfengine/puppet, but
sometimes it just an overkill to use them if you are the only one
administrating those machines.

cfengine and puppet have a very good place on machines that are administered
by a team of people.

But solutions like pdsh/pconsole and multy-command, in my opinion are more
suitable when there are only one or two guys administering those machines.


Marian
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 09-05-2011, 07:46 AM
James Nguyen
 
Default managing a rack full of centos servers

I'm managing two data centers and some instances on rackspace cloud servers. *Currently running Cobbler+Puppet+Mcollective. *So far it's been great for a team of one, myself. *
At the moment I'm looking into either using Aeolus or Openstack to bridge the gap of my data centers and the public cloud still keeping Puppet+Mcollective in the mix and seeing if Cobbler is still needed.

Anyone out there tried both Aeolus *and* Openstack yet? *I'm looking to*supplement*my research on these two private/public cloud tools. =)
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 3:19 PM, Marian Marinov <mm@yuhu.biz> wrote:

On Thursday 21 July 2011 18:36:17 Devin Reade wrote:

> --On Wednesday, July 20, 2011 11:02:42 PM -0700 RC <cooleyr@gmail.com>

>

> wrote:

> > On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 10:07:06 -0600 Devin Reade <gdr@gno.org> wrote:

> >> It should be considered as complementing the automated config

> >> management tools like cfengine et al, not as a replacement for

> >> them (they're doing different jobs).

> >

> > That's not entirely fair. *A little shell scripting and pdsh and pdcp

> > can certainly do everything cfengine/puppet can do

>

> I wasn't referring to pdsh/pdcp; I was referring to pconsole. *The

> reason I said complementing is that sometimes it is good to have

> stuff under a configuration management system like cfengine/puppet,

> but sometimes you need to run ad-hoc commands, in an identical

> fashion, on lots of similar machines, which pconsole is good at

> (subject to the caveats I previously mentioned).

>

> I made no comments on pdsh/pdcp at all, and make no claims on where

> it fits in the spectrum.

>

> Devin

>

You can actually achieve the same functionality of pdsh/pdcp and pconsole with

a quite simple bash script



*http://multy-command.sourceforge.net/



I think it is a matter of what the admin will prefer to do. When you have a

lot of identical machines, sometimes it is better to have cfengine/puppet, but

sometimes it just an overkill to use them if you are the only one

administrating those machines.



cfengine and puppet have a very good place on machines that are administered

by a team of people.



But solutions like pdsh/pconsole and multy-command, in my opinion are more

suitable when there are only one or two guys administering those machines.





Marian


_______________________________________________

CentOS mailing list

CentOS@centos.org

http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos




--


james h nguyen |*lead systems architect |*www.callfire.com*|*1.949.625.4263



_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 09-05-2011, 10:52 PM
Trey Dockendorf
 
Default managing a rack full of centos servers

On Sep 5, 2011 2:47 AM, "James Nguyen" <james@callfire.com> wrote:

>

> I'm managing two data centers and some instances on rackspace cloud servers. *Currently running Cobbler+Puppet+Mcollective. *So far it's been great for a team of one, myself. *

>

> At the moment I'm looking into either using Aeolus or Openstack to bridge the gap of my data centers and the public cloud still keeping Puppet+Mcollective in the mix and seeing if Cobbler is still needed.

>

> Anyone out there tried both Aeolus *and* Openstack yet? *I'm looking to*supplement*my research on these two private/public cloud tools. =)

>

> On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 3:19 PM, Marian Marinov <mm@yuhu.biz> wrote:

>>

>> On Thursday 21 July 2011 18:36:17 Devin Reade wrote:

>> > --On Wednesday, July 20, 2011 11:02:42 PM -0700 RC <cooleyr@gmail.com>

>> >

>> > wrote:

>> > > On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 10:07:06 -0600 Devin Reade <gdr@gno.org> wrote:

>> > >> It should be considered as complementing the automated config

>> > >> management tools like cfengine et al, not as a replacement for

>> > >> them (they're doing different jobs).

>> > >

>> > > That's not entirely fair. *A little shell scripting and pdsh and pdcp

>> > > can certainly do everything cfengine/puppet can do

>> >

>> > I wasn't referring to pdsh/pdcp; I was referring to pconsole. *The

>> > reason I said complementing is that sometimes it is good to have

>> > stuff under a configuration management system like cfengine/puppet,

>> > but sometimes you need to run ad-hoc commands, in an identical

>> > fashion, on lots of similar machines, which pconsole is good at

>> > (subject to the caveats I previously mentioned).

>> >

>> > I made no comments on pdsh/pdcp at all, and make no claims on where

>> > it fits in the spectrum.

>> >

>> > Devin

>> >

>> You can actually achieve the same functionality of pdsh/pdcp and pconsole with

>> a quite simple bash script

>>

>> *http://multy-command.sourceforge.net/

>>

>> I think it is a matter of what the admin will prefer to do. When you have a

>> lot of identical machines, sometimes it is better to have cfengine/puppet, but

>> sometimes it just an overkill to use them if you are the only one

>> administrating those machines.

>>

>> cfengine and puppet have a very good place on machines that are administered

>> by a team of people.

>>

>> But solutions like pdsh/pconsole and multy-command, in my opinion are more

>> suitable when there are only one or two guys administering those machines.

>>

>>

>> Marian

>>

>> _______________________________________________

>> CentOS mailing list

>> CentOS@centos.org

>> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

>>

>

>

>

> --

>

> james h nguyen |*lead systems architect |*www.callfire.com*|*1.949.625.4263

>

> _______________________________________________

> CentOS mailing list

> CentOS@centos.org

> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

>


+1 for Puppet.* I manage only around 20 servers all running a mix of CentOS 5.6 and CentOS 6 very well with Puppet.* The initial configuration and understanding for it is daunting but WELL worth it in the end.* Also for system provisioning ( kickstart and pxe) look at Foreman, which uses Puppet after initial installation.


_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 09:18 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org