Chef Vs Puppet – A comparative study
DevOps is becoming a trending and successful methodology due to many reasons and primarily due to the concurrent happening of development and operations. With the usage of several tools, DevOps is dominating the entire development fraternity. Among them, chef and puppet are the two core configuration management tools. However, amateurs and even experienced professionals still feel confused to choose among chef puppet for their projects.
Keeping that in mind we have designed our DevOps certification course explaining in-depth about chef and puppet. Also, here we would like to give a crisp yet clear explanation about both these tools for the benefit of all readers.
Top 10 Difference Between Chef and Puppet
We would want to start directly with a comparison table to enlighten you with the basic difference between chef and puppet. This will let you choose the right tool for your project. At the same time, we will also explain What is Chef and Puppet as well as the need for comparing them both before we conclude with our recommendation.
|1||Replacement in the event of failure ||The backup server can replace the chef-server ||An alternate master can be replaced for a failed master which is active |
|2||The language used for configuration||Ruby DSL||Puppet DSL or Embedded Ruby|
|3||Installation time and ease||It is time-consuming and complex||Comparatively easy still takes time due to certificate signing between the agent and the master |
|4||Accessibility ||Only accessible to chef clients for configuration||Puppet clients can configure for master machine and client machine |
|5||Scalability||Massive codes make it difficult for scalable deployments||Large Puppet codes are difficult to creating scalability issues |
|6||Platforms Run on||Windows, enterprise Linux distributions, Cisco IO, Solaris, Nexus, AIX and AWS||Red Had Linux, Debian, Windows Server OS, Windows Consumer OS 10, Mac 10.12|
|7||Concepts ||Chef uses cookbooks and recipes to describe generic concepts||Puppet uses manifest to describe single concepts |
|8||Price||The annual fee for chef automation is close to USD 140 with which build and deployment can be done||Puppet annual fee ranges between USD 110 and 199 for standard and premium plan|
|9||Skills required ||Strong programming skills are required to make chef your best friend||System administrators will easily learn the knack to use Puppet |
Configuration automation Role-based access control
DevOps workflow automation Infrastructure automation
Enroll in our DevOps online training and deep dive into more differences between chef and puppet to grow as the best DevOps professional in your career.
What are Chef and Puppet
Chef, the configuration management tool makes automation possible across several devices and servers with not many steps to follow. It uses a declarative approach to coding and hence removes the demand of creating pages of codes. Just in few clicks one can deploy as well as manage all the software applications in all devices across the business. This makes life easy as there is no need for professionals to know hardcore coding. One can kick start a career with minimal knowledge in coding. That is the power of this automation tool. The only requirement to start with the chef is to know Ruby DSL language basics which will also be taught in every DevOps online course.
Puppet centralizes and automates the configuration management process within no time. It is available in an open source version allowing anyone to learn and make use of it. Puppet will individually configure each host and monitors continuously all the configurations. Yes, irrespective of the number of servers puppet does it easily. Further, it has control over many infrastructures and is used for deploying several applications in servers automatically. Puppet also uses declarative specific language (DSL) and defines the attributes of each environment.
Why Chef Vs Puppet comparisons are required
If you are a beginner, then you may wonder the reason behind this comparative study between chef and puppet. But there are few reasons we want to highlight to make you feel confident about why this comparison is even required.
We agree that the DevOps life cycle supports every individual to learn development, coding, testing, operations, configurations, administration, etc. However, each individual will have their strength and there the comparison between chef and puppet will let you choose the right tool.
1. It is because people are the core strength of every successful project. Therefore, when your team has strong system admins, you must go with Puppet to keep things rolling smoothly. In the event of strong developers are present in your team then choose Chef for successful configuration of software applications in any number of devices and servers.
2. Know that Chef is code-driven and hence flexible in configuration control. Puppet is no less and offers powerful reporting abilities. Remember to choose Puppet for model-driven requirements and it has less control.
3. One must know or learn Ruby to opt chef but Puppet DSL will let you work on the puppet with minimal training.
4. Chef is a traditional tool and is extremely capable to handle any complex job. Puppet is the best one for larger enterprises and is relatively new but well tested.
Now after looking at these pointers you will realize the need for this comparison between two configuration management tools. Even though both pull configuration, one suits the other perfectly based on several factors we discussed. Go ahead and choose the right tool with the help of this study.
Connect with our DevOps training online to discuss with our expert trainers to brainstorm and learn.
It is needless to say which one to choose as you will already know which the best for your project is as you know the differences chef and puppet. Based on your project need, the number of servers, ease of use, scalability, and team strength you can pick choose either one of them.
We strongly recommend you enroll in the DevOps course to master the art of making the best use of tools in your projects.