21

There are of course several pro and cons for each of Puppet, Ansible, Chef and add your favorite tool here as well. So I'll try to stay away from opinion, and share what is great in Ansible as a matter of fact. The main capability that puts Ansible above the others is not having to rely on some custom/additional agent running on the target nodes, instead ...


11

No, people moving away from Puppet to Ansible (or vice versa) has nothing to do with what can or cannot be accomplished with either tool. Puppet/Chef/Ansible - it's mostly a matter of taste. For example, Ansible is based on Python, and Python developers typically feel more at home with it (no need to learn a DSL), or Ruby (for Chef)). Easier for Python ...


8

Until Puppet 4.0 there was no easy way to orchestrate application spread over multiple servers or services, as it was hard to specifically order actions in Puppet, which was a design choice. Ansible was better at orchestrating and ordering the steps, especially across multiple servers. This was especially significant in applications where the wrong order of ...


6

While Romeo has laid out the basic facts I'd like to add a bit of experience to the answer: Basics Cacti is focused on graphs. It doesn't do any of the up/down monitoring that is provided by something like Nagios. Classically Nagios does not provide any useful graphs, but more on that later. Config Scaling Cacti tends to be configured through the GUI ...


5

Nagios is generic monitoring solution which can be extended by using snmp agents, custom plugins and so on. Cacti is a complete frontend to RRDTool, it stores all of the necessary information to create graphs and populate them with data in a MySQL database (from here) Cacti can be used as graph solution in Nagios to represent in graphic manner ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible