Share your experience using Solano CI

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.

We integrate TeamCity with Git for our development process. After the integration, we set up commands using web method integration to allow users to create builds and perform other tasks. These builds are then deployed on our internal servers.

We've found that TeamCity has significantly improved our deployment process by automating tasks that were previously done manually. This automation has reduced deployment time and increased efficiency for our team. 

One of the most beneficial features for us is the flexibility it offers in creating deployment steps tailored to different technologies. While we haven't used all of its capabilities extensively yet, we've found it easy to integrate with other solutions and flexible in handling various technologies. As for scalability, we've managed large-scale projects effectively by configuring different agents based on the project's scale and volume, which TeamCity supports well. Regarding stability and performance, while we haven't faced significant challenges, any issues we encounter are typically resolved by referring to the documentation, given our limited experience with TeamCity.

I haven't faced many challenges or issues that I would like to see improved in TeamCity. As for deployment challenges, they are often tied to the specific technology being integrated with TeamCity. In my case, integrating with certain technologies posed challenges related to time and required support from the respective technology teams to ensure smooth integration with TeamCity.

I have using TeamCity for the past 6 months. 

I don't have direct experience with maintenance or technical support for TeamCity as I'm not an administrator. My role primarily involves programming and user-level tasks. Therefore, I haven't escalated any questions to technical support.

The setup process was already done when I started working with it, so I didn't have much experience with that aspect. However, configuring the technology and integrating it was straightforward and easy to do. We are using the cloud version of TeamCity, and the experience has been smooth without major hurdles or complexities.

My overall rating for TeamCity is a 6, but I acknowledge that this rating is based on my limited experience with the tool. I haven't delved deeply into its functionalities or compared it extensively with other automation tools, which is why I consider it an average rating for now.