What is our primary use case?
My primary use for
Ansible on CentOS 10 is to prioritize product testing, and thanks to
Ansible on CentOS 10, I can automate deployments on multiple
CentOS and Red Hat machines.
A concrete example of automation I have carried out with this tool is performing upgrades of different products on different environments, which allowed us to have the same configuration on all environments thanks to Ansible on CentOS 10, while minimizing the impact of human error on the configurations.
Ansible on CentOS 10 is a very powerful product for deploying configurations, product installations, or actions on different machines at the same time, and Ansible Tower complements it by adding the ability to create sequential action flows via Ansible on CentOS 10.
What is most valuable?
The best features that this tool offers me include
Infrastructure as Code as the first, environment stability through controlled configurations which allows me to have identical (ISO) environments as the second, and the ability to very quickly deploy the same configurations on 1, 10, or 100 machines as the third, which is very useful for saving time.
Infrastructure as Code with this tool has changed the way my team works by allowing us to have a sort of pseudo documentation in the code. Thanks to the code that is in Ansible on CentOS 10 in Git, it allows us to quickly understand and have a standard structure thanks to Ansible Galaxy. Even if a new team member joins our team, they are not lost thanks to the standard structure from Ansible Galaxy.
The positive impact this tool has had on my organization is that when there are bugs in an environment, it is very easy to reproduce the bug in a test environment because the configuration is the same. This has been a huge time saver to have identical (ISO) configurations between environments and thus to have the same behaviors and to reproduce bugs and to understand and debug them.
What needs improvement?
In my opinion, Ansible on CentOS 10 could be improved in the simulation part. In Ansible on CentOS 10, it is possible to test a playbook without actually executing it. However, from time to time when it simulates, if a file does not exist, even though it is a simulation, it fails with an error, which is unfortunate because the simulation should take into account this kind of non-existence since we are in a simulation.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using this tool for about a year and a half.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I have noticed 100% reliability with this tool, as I have never really had any issues with it. The only behavioral issues I have encountered are when we do not fully understand a plugin, and sometimes it is more a knowledge issue than a product stability issue. Ansible on CentOS 10 is very stable and works very well, and the expected results are often around 98%.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
The scalability of this tool meets my needs when the number of machines or environments increases. Its strong point is scalability; the more hosts you have, the faster you go.
How are customer service and support?
I rate the customer support for Ansible on CentOS 10 by saying that I have never needed to contact support as I go on Stack Overflow and I look into Ansible on CentOS 10's own documentation, finding it really powerful and extraordinary.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I did use another solution before, specifically
Puppet, Salt, and
Chef, and I find that the most straightforward one for configuration, speed, and everything is Ansible on CentOS 10.
What led me to choose Ansible on CentOS 10 over Salt, Puppet, or Chef is its ease of installation, its fast compatibility with the SSH protocol, its simplicity in setting up and creating playbooks, the standardization of structures via Ansible Galaxy, and the fast integration if I purchase Red Hat's Ansible Tower.
How was the initial setup?
Ansible on CentOS 10 is deployed in my organization fully on premise.
What was our ROI?
I have seen a return on investment with this tool. For the debugging part, when we have identical (ISO) behaviors, it is easy to reproduce a production behavior in a test environment, leading to time savings. Infrastructure as Code allows us to have good documentation of behaviors and operations, so documentation on
SharePoint or
Confluence is much smaller, which is another time saving aspect. Installing a product or a patch or anything via Ansible on CentOS 10 allows us to install it on 1, 10, 20, 100 machines, and the more machines we have, the more time we save.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Regarding pricing, implementation costs, and licenses for this tool, Ansible on CentOS 10 is free, so we implemented it. The only cost is the working time of the team members and myself.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
Before choosing Ansible on CentOS 10, I did not evaluate other similar solutions, as it was my experience with previous products that led us to use Ansible on CentOS 10.
What other advice do I have?
My advice to others considering using Ansible on CentOS 10 is to first create a standard and put an initial setup in place, meaning to agree on the sudoers part and to properly secure the SSH part. Then create a standard for the structure of files and folders. I also advise creating a kind of reference bible so that everyone is on the same wavelength when they develop.
I would suggest an improvement for interview processes to allow more response time because when there is a pause in the conversation for a few seconds, it feels as if moving to the next question occurs, so being more patient before moving to the next question would be beneficial.
I rate this product an 8 out of 10.
