3 ms·
Some automation is good, but no one reaches for these tools because they need "some" automation. They do it because they have already obscenely over-complex app
by ddevault 7y ago
Some automation is good, but no one reaches for these tools because they need "some" automation. They do it because they have already obscenely over-complex applications which require these levels of complexity just to stand them up. Or worse, they don't have that level of complexity, but they use these tools anyway, which means that they account for more than half of the software's complexity in the first place.
- tptacek 7y agoThat’s not what you said upthread. Salt, k8s, Ansible: they’re all the same. That’s what you said.
- ddevault 7y agoI don't understand how anything that I've said is in opposition to my original point.
- tptacek 7y ago"Some automation is good" is not a statement compatible with (here I paraphrase) "tools that run a consistent set of shell commands on an arbitrary set of machines are the same as tools that install resident agents on those machines". It's OK if you didn't know how Salt (or Ansible, maybe) worked, but you should just acknowledge that and move on rather than doubling down.
- ddevault 7y agoDon't resort to acusations of ignorance just because you aren't making your point effectively. I have hands-on experience with every tool I've mentioned except for k8s, which isn't being discussed in detail. I am under no illusions that the security profile of Salt vs Ansible is different. If that's all you're getting at, then fine, I concede, do your little victory lap. My point is and has been much broader: these tools solve the same class of problems which are symptoms of a broken culture, and solve them poorly. It's no surprise to me that any and all of them have problems, have had problems, and will have more problems - because they're broken by design, and they "solve" problems that we shouldn't have.