Ansible vs. Puppet vs. Chef

[KodeKloud]

When it comes to managing a large, complex infrastructure, automation is key. Gone are the days of manually configuring servers one by one. Now, with the help of configuration management tools like Ansible, Chef, and Puppet, you can automate repetitive tasks and manage hundreds or even thousands of servers at once. This saves time, reduces the potential for human error, and allows you to scale your infrastructure quickly and easily. 

This article compares three popular configuration management tools: Ansible, Puppet, and Chef. We’ll explain how each works and then see their similarities and differences. Lastly, we’ll share when to use each of them.

Welcome to KodeKloud!

We are the #1 DevOps courses provider. Register today to gain access to the richest collection of DevOps courses and labs and try sample lessons of all our courses.

No credit card required!

START FREE!

What is Ansible?

Ansible is an open-source tool for automating infrastructure deployment, configuration, and management. It allows you to automate repetitive tasks, manage infrastructure as code, and increase productivity. It is agentless, meaning it does not require any software to be installed on the managed nodes.

How Ansible Works?

Ansible works by connecting to remote nodes and executing tasks on them using SSH protocol. It uses a push-based model, meaning the control machine pushes the configuration to the managed nodes. 

Ansible uses a simple YAML syntax to define the tasks to be executed on the remote nodes. These tasks are grouped together into a playbook, which is a collection of tasks that are executed in a specific order. Playbooks can be used to manage a single node or multiple nodes at once. 

To learn more about playbooks, check out this blog: What is Ansible Playbook and How to Write it?

Ansible also has a concept called inventory, which is a list of hosts or nodes that Ansible can manage. The inventory can be defined in a simple text file or using dynamic inventory scripts that can pull the inventory from various sources like AWS, GCP, or OpenStack.

What is Puppet?

Puppet is an open-source IaC tool designed to automate tasks related to managing and configuring systems. By using Puppet, administrators can define the desired state of a system once, and it takes care of the details of making the system match that state over time. Puppet requires an agent to be installed on the systems that need to be managed.

How Does Puppet Work?

Puppet uses a client-server architecture to manage systems. The Puppet server runs on a central system, and Puppet clients, called "agents," run on the systems that need to be managed. The Puppet server stores the desired configuration for each puppet agent, and the agents periodically check in with the server to see if their configuration needs to be updated.

Puppet uses a declarative language called Puppet DSL (Domain-Specific Language) to define system configurations. In Puppet DSL, administrators define the desired state of a system, and Puppet takes care of the details of making the system match that state. Puppet DSL makes it easy to define complex configurations, and it provides a high level of abstraction that makes it easier to manage large numbers of systems.

When a Puppet agent checks in with the server, the server compares the desired state of the system with the current state of the system, and it generates a list of changes that need to be made. The agent then applies those changes to the system, bringing it into the desired state. This process is called "configuration drift management," and it ensures that systems stay in the desired state over time.

What is Chef?

Chef is an open-source IaC tool designed for automating infrastructure deployment, configuration, and management. It allows administrators to define the desired state of a system in code, and Chef takes care of making the system match that state over time. It requires an agent to be installed on the systems that need to be managed. 

How Does Chef Work?

Chef uses a client-server architecture and a declarative language called Ruby DSL to define system configurations. The Chef server stores the desired configuration for each Chef agent, and the agents periodically check in with the server to see if their configuration needs to be updated. 

After a Chef agent checks in with the server, the server analyzes the system's current state and compares it with the desired state specified in the code. The server then generates a list of changes that need to be made to bring the system into the desired state. The Chef agent then applies these changes to the system, ensuring that it stays in the desired state over time. 

Similarities Between Ansible vs. Chef vs. Puppet

Below are some of the similarities that the three IaC tools share.

I. Open source

All three tools are open source. They are freely available and can be used, modified, and distributed by anyone under their respective open-source license. However, they also have an Enterprise version with additional features and support, which requires a paid license.

II. Automation

Although implemented differently, the three tools allow users to automate infrastructure management tasks. This includes tasks like provisioning servers, configuring software, deploying applications, monitoring systems, and managing security. By automating these tasks, you can reduce manual errors, improve consistency, increase efficiency, and save time. 

III. Infrastructure as Code

All three tools declare the tasks to be implemented as code, allowing for version control implementation. They all support Git, SVN, and other version control systems.

The three tools also have dedicated repositories:

• Ansible has Ansible Galaxy,  a public repository of Ansible roles, to share your roles with others and discover new roles created by the community.
• Chef has Chef Supermarket, a public repository of Chef cookbooks, to share your cookbooks with others and discover new cookbooks created by the community.
• Puppet has Puppet Forge, a public repository of Puppet modules, to share your modules with others and discover new modules created by the community.

IV. Community

Ansible, Chef, and Puppet have large and active communities, with thousands of playbooks, modules, and cookbooks available for common tasks. The communities provide the innovation, collaboration, support, testing, and documentation needed to create a robust and reliable software ecosystem.

Differences Between Ansible vs. Chef vs. Puppet

Below are the differences between the three tools:

I. Language

Ansible uses YAML as its primary language for defining playbooks and inventory files. However, tasks in playbooks can also be written in other languages such as Python, Bash, Ruby, etc.

Chef uses a Ruby DSL (Domain Specific Language) for defining its configuration code. However, Chef resources can also be written in other languages such as Python, Bash, PowerShell, etc.

Puppet uses its own declarative language for defining its configuration code, which is called Puppet DSL. However, Puppet also supports other languages such as Ruby, EPP (Embedded Puppet), and JSON for defining its manifests and templates.

II. Architecture

Ansible follows a clientless architecture, which means it doesn't require any agent or software to be installed on the remote host. Instead, it uses SSH (Secure Shell) protocol to establish a connection to the remote host and execute the desired tasks.

Chef and Puppet follow a client-server architecture, which means they require a client to be installed on the remote host. They also need a master server to manage the configuration code. 

III. Communication Models

Ansible uses a push-based model, which means the control machine pushes the configurations to the target hosts. The target hosts don't actively request the configuration changes but instead, receive them from the control machine. While this model provides the benefit of centralized control over the configuration changes, it may face scalability issues when dealing with a large number of target hosts.

Chef and Puppet use a pull-based model, which means the client periodically pulls the configurations from the server. The clients in target hosts are responsible for initiating the configuration changes by requesting the latest configuration files from the central server. The benefit of this model is that it reduces the load on the central server and is, therefore, more easily scalable as the number of target hosts increases.

Push vs. Pull models

IV. Communication Protocol

Ansible uses SSH (Secure Shell) protocol to establish a connection to the remote hosts. Ansible also supports other communication protocols such as "Paramiko," which is a Python implementation of SSHv2, and "WinRM," which is a protocol used for remote management of Windows machines. 

Chef uses its own protocol, called the "Chef client-server protocol," which is based on HTTP and HTTPS. 

Puppet uses its own communication protocol, called the "Puppet protocol," which is based on HTTP and HTTPS. 

V. Security and Encryption

Ansible uses SSH, which ensures that all communication between the control machine and the target hosts is encrypted and secure. It allows you to use SSH keys instead of passwords for authentication, making it more secure because it eliminates the need to store passwords on the control machine.

Both Chef and Puppet’s protocols use SSL (Secure Sockets Layer) encryption to ensure that all communication between the master server and the target hosts is secure and encrypted.

VI. Learning Curve

Ansible is generally considered to have a relatively easy learning curve compared to Chef and Puppet. It uses a simple, human-readable syntax that makes it easy to write and understand playbooks, which are Ansible's configuration management scripts.

Chef has a steeper learning curve compared to Ansible, largely due to its complex architecture and the use of Ruby as its primary programming language. Users need to learn how to write Ruby code to create Chef cookbooks. Additionally, Chef requires the installation of a special agent software called the Chef client on remote machines, which adds an extra layer of complexity to the setup process.

Puppet's learning curve is similar to that of Chef and can be considered steeper than Ansible's. It uses a custom programming language, which users need to learn in order to create manifests. It also requires the installation of agent software on remote machines, making the setup process more complex.

The table below summarizes the differences discussed above:

Attribute	Ansible	Chef	Puppet
Language	YAML	Ruby DSL	Puppet DSL
Architecture	Clientless	client-server	client-server
Communication Models	push-based	pull-based	pull-based
Communication Protocol	SSH protocol	Chef client-server protocol	Puppet protocol
Security and Encryption	SSH	SSL	SSL

Choosing Between Ansible Chef and Puppet

When to use Ansible

Use Ansible when you want a secure tool that’s easy to set up and run. That's because it does not require any special agent software to be installed on remote machines, simplifying the setup process. Secondly, it has an easy learning curve, making it beginner-friendly. Additionally, it uses SSH, a secure communication protocol.

When to Use Chef

Chef offers a high degree of flexibility and customization, making it a powerful tool for managing complex infrastructure. For users with the necessary skills and experience, Chef can be a highly effective tool for automating configuration management tasks. Nonetheless, it may take longer to learn than other tools and may not be the best choice for users who are new to automation or do not have extensive programming experience.

When to use Puppet

Puppet's complexity is also one of its strengths, offering a high degree of customization and flexibility. It is well-suited to managing large and complex infrastructure. It is particularly useful for organizations with a significant number of servers or applications that require configuration management at scale. 

Conclusion

Ansible, Chef, and Puppet are all popular configuration management tools used to automate infrastructure management tasks. Each tool has its own strengths and weaknesses and is better suited to certain use cases than others.

Ultimately, the choice between Ansible, Chef, and Puppet should be based on your specific needs and requirements. If you have a small infrastructure with simple configurations, Ansible may be your best choice. Chef or Puppet may be a better fit if you have a large and complex infrastructure requiring extensive customization and control.

To learn more about Ansible, check out our Ansible Basics course. The course will teach you the basic Ansible concepts with easy-to-do hands-on exercises that you can solve right on the browser.

View the full article