Hi Tass, If I understood your question correctly, you were wondering if you should deploy puppet as a "standalone" client server model, vs. a hybrid client+server on each of your hosts. You should shoot for the standalone option.
Puppet is essentially a webserver. You can scale it with multiple puppet masters and load balancing. The argument to centralize your configuration management service is the same for centralization of any IT service. Easier Manageability, Maintainability, etc. The need to run puppet in a standalone fashion is an interesting one. I believe it boils down to not being able to trust the network and the ssl authentication process built into puppet. Or having a sophisticated SSH infrastructure already in place and not wanting to deploy a new protocol. If either of these situations apply to you shoot for a standalone puppet client and rsync over ssh the /etc/ puppet/modules/ directory. Doing a client+server would be an additional layer of un-needed complexity. -Tom On Jul 5, 7:53 am, Harihara Vinayakaram <[email protected]> wrote: > Can't you use Puppet to upgrade client versions ? I read about puppet > being used to upgrade and all that . So why can you not upgrade your > client versions using puppet itself ? > > Regards > Haro > > On Jul 4, 2:17 pm, Tass Skoudros <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > A little history, I work with a small startup and we are looking at > > rolling out a automated cloud based provisioning platform. We have a > > dilemma and i wanted to ask your communities thoughts. > > > As far as I am aware there are 3 ways to run puppet, standalone with > > puppet, Client/Server and a hybrid of client/server and rsync. The > > last of these wouldn't work very well in our case so I am not looking > > at it as a potential solution. > > > We have tried the standalone, its slick. To me the standalone method > > is intended to address a need thats something entirely different to > > what we require. I moved on. > > > I then went on to the client/server method. Essentially there are 2 > > ways this can work, the first is we(startup) control the master and > > deploy clients. The second is we deploy master+client on every server, > > the configuration would point to our external node web service. > > > Each has its own advantage and we will be using external nodes to load > > the configurations in both cases. The differences are that the first > > would quickly become an issue when the version of the puppet client > > changes. So we have been exploring the second of these and still have > > other encounters that break with our goal of full automation. > > > So my question, is there a better way? Am I missing something. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
