Share your experience using Chef

Chef is primarily used for configuration management. For example, if you are managing a large number of servers (thousands or more), it is essential to ensure that the configurations across all servers are consistent. Otherwise, making any changes to the configurations would require writing a script to apply those changes across all the servers. Additionally, end-users may change configurations on multiple servers, leading to inconsistencies across different servers. To avoid this, configuration management is required.

We use Chef for this purpose by using a server-client mechanism. We apply changes to the Chef server, and every 30 to 40 minutes (depending on the configuration), Chef will verify whether the server has the required configuration. If not, it will revert to the required configuration automatically.

The solution could improve in managing role-based access. This would be helpful.

I have been using Chef for approximately four years.

The solution is stable.

Chef can be scaled as needed. The Chef server itself can scale but it depends on the available resources. You can upgrade specific resources to meet the demand. Similarly, with clients, you can add as many clients as you need. Again, this depends on the server resources. If the server has enough resources, it can handle the number of servers required to manage the infrastructure. Chef can be scaled to meet the needs of the infrastructure being managed.

The solution is good to manage multiple large infrastructures.

We can have 10 to 10,000 users using this solution and it manages them well.

I have not contacted technical support.

The initial setup of Chef is simple. The time it takes for the setup depends on what is included in the environment. However, it typically can be done in one day.

Learning to write cookbooks to manage infrastructure with Chef does have a learning curve, but it is steady and manageable. However, if you're looking for an alternative with an easier learning curve, I would suggest evaluating other options such as Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, and comparing them to Chef. Some alternatives have a much simpler learning curve than Chef.

I rate Chef a seven out of ten.

Chef is a configuration management tool, and I work for the product team of Chef. All the DevOps teams mainly use Chef for configuration management of their servers or infrastructure.

Chef is a great tool for an automation person who wants to do configuration management with infrastructure as a code.

Chef does not support the containerized things of Chef products. In the future, Chef could develop a docker container or docker images.

I have been using Chef for four years.

I rate Chef a nine out of ten for stability.

Thousands of customers are using the solution.

I rate Chef a nine out of ten for scalability.

The solution's technical support team is really good, and you can directly contact them regarding any issues.

Positive

The solution's initial setup for clients is very easy, but it is moderate for the infra server. The solution's documentation is very good, and its installation can be done in 15 to 20 minutes.

Chef is priced based on the number of nodes.

Overall, I rate Chef a nine out of ten.