Ansible on CentOS 10

I have created resources for the monitoring tech stack with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform , especially for setting up one master data center and another data center for different applications routed to the monitoring setup, where I have created Splunk servers and installed all Splunk agents and prerequisites with the help of Ansible , including an Ansible playbook.

I have used the agentless architecture in Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, as SSH is agentless.

I use a centralized automation controller in Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, called the master setup, where we execute our commands with installed prerequisites, inventory information, and the Ansible playbook, managing other node servers with a passwordless setup.

When creating any server with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, it is a significant advantage because if we set up a Splunk agent in one case, it is necessary for each server. By writing the playbook, the agent is installed immediately during server provisioning, providing us with an edge.

Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is very helpful due to passwordless integration and the ability to interact with multiple servers at once, which is especially advantageous when dealing with thousands of servers.

The integration aspect of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform has optimized my IT ecosystem significantly by consolidating multiple tools, such as a CI/CD pipeline with Jenkins , where we validate everything, including testing and SonarQube code quality.

The agentless architecture of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, using the SSH key, makes it passwordless and allows us to push configurations with one click, creating a major advantage.

Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform's main benefit is that it allows us to push configurations to multiple servers without manually visiting each one, maintaining efficiency.

I have observed that Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform could improve by creating modules for upcoming AI and ML tech stacks, as currently, specific modules for these are not available.

I have worked on Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, especially Ansible Playbooks, for around three years.

I have not encountered any performance issues, crashes, downtimes, or limitations with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform.

Ansible is a Red Hat product, so they provide all necessary support.

I have not escalated any questions to the Red Hat support team regarding Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, as their modules are professional and complete.

Positive

Both Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and Chef  have similar capabilities but differ in architecture; one is agentless while the other is agent-full.

Setting up Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform on the AWS  cloud is very straightforward; I take one server, install Ansible, set up the inventory, and use it.

By using the enterprise version of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, we receive support that aids in overcoming challenges, a measurable benefit in terms of ROI.

For enterprise users of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, there are fees, but it is free and open-source for testing or small labs.

I have worked with Chef  as a configuration management tool for one project, and I have used Chef and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform together in the same project.

I have worked on the AWS  cloud with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform.

Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform was hosted on AWS.

I prefer Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform because it is easy to implement, and the extensive supporting documentation is very helpful.

I suggest everyone consider Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform because it is agentless, easy to implement, and has sufficient supporting documentation available.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform a ten out of ten.

They are using Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform  for infrastructure automation and cloud automation. The platform is used for CI/CD automation, deployment, and automation. The main use is infrastructure automation.

Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform  is easy to integrate. The platform is simple to use.

The dashboarding capabilities should be improved by bringing CMP  (Cloud Management  Platform) into Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform. Event-Driven Ansible is very important in the platform. Both Event-Driven Ansible and cloud management platform features are crucial improvements needed.

We have been using Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform since 2018, which is more than seven to eight years.

The stability of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is excellent, deserving a 10 out of 10 rating.

The technical support is not adequate. The Ansible sales and technical support services need significant improvement.

Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform comes with a high price point. Even though we use the platform, we need additional dashboarding tools because the complete infrastructure as code dashboard capability is missing.

Red Hat introduced a new product called Red Hat Developer Hub for platform engineering. While Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is very good for automation, deserving an 8 out of 10 rating, the cost of combining Red Hat Developer Hub and Ansible is extremely high, which presents a significant challenge with the Red Hat product.

In AWS , customers are increasingly using Terraform  rather than Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform. This is particularly true for cloud-based operations on AWS .

The choice between solutions depends on the situation. Developers tend to be more inclined towards Terraform , while infrastructure teams prefer Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform.

We are still actively working with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform. Customers typically purchase directly from Red Hat for on-premise deployments, while those on public cloud buy from the marketplace.

We are recommending the solution to users as a Red Hat partner.

This review rates Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform a 10 out of 10.

We mostly utilize Ansible  for deployment automation and CI/CD pipelines.

I have used some of the Ansible  libraries for some of the deployments. The way conditions are handled in Ansible, such as skip conditions or failure conditions, can be complex with multiple conditions, but there is support for using them. 

Additionally, the automation capabilities streamline deployment processes, providing reliability and reducing manual intervention and errors.

More library support for microservices architecture and Kubernetes  would be helpful. There is also a need to improve the handling of conditions, which can be tricky and require the use of flags.

I have been working with Ansible for about six to seven years.

Ansible is quite stable. There are infrastructure-wise reliability and fewer issues, although network issues might cause some failures.

Ansible can face scalability issues, such as limitations when trying to scale up infrastructure. It might struggle with connection dropping or spawning additional VMs under certain conditions.

I have used both Ansible and Terraform . Ansible can lag when compared to Terraform  for certain microservice deployments.

The initial setup can be challenging and is not very intuitive. A person needs to be knowledgeable in Ansible, and it should be well documented.

The benefits include the maintainability of the existing environment, especially a hybrid infrastructure. Ansible makes scripting and learning processes better and easier.

There is a pricing associated with Ansible, however, I find it reasonable.

I would recommend Ansible. That said, it depends on the infrastructure and whether an off-premises or on-premises cloud is used. 

I would rate Ansible between eight and nine.

We use Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform  for the automation of our servers and applications. We also use both Terraform  and Ansible  to automate our infrastructure.

Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform has saved our time and reduced errors in our processes. It used to take us two months to provide a server in our organization, and now it only takes a few minutes to have the same server. Automation has ensured that tasks are done in the same way every time, reducing the likelihood of errors.

The capacity to install products on the operating system is very valuable. Ansible is better at handling the final configuration of servers. We prefer Terraform  for creating multiple resources in a project, but Ansible is better for final configurations.

Ansible's centric idea of servers needs to be changed. In modern infrastructure, there are more than just servers. The initial server-centric approach in Ansible is a bit strange. It should improve its functionality with cloud resources like Azure , AWS , or Google Cloud . 

Ansible could also improve its capabilities in managing several resources at the same time, similar to Terraform. Moreover, more integration with other tools would be beneficial.

I have been using Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform for about three to four years.

The stability of Ansible is rated high, around eight to nine on a scale of ten.

We haven't experienced any problems with Ansible's scalability. We use it at the project level and create around ten to 20 resources. We haven't tested it with thousands of servers, so it's difficult to say how it would perform in such scenarios.

We are using the free version of Ansible, and so far, the support has been very high, considering that it is a free version. We are in discussions with Red Hat and IBM about possibly purchasing the commercial version when we start using Ansible for patching servers.

Positive

Before Ansible, we used BladeLogic from BMC. We switched to Ansible as it was easier to use, had more functionality, and there were more people in the market who knew Ansible compared to BladeLogic. Overall, Ansible is a much better product.

The setup of Ansible is easy. It's faster to start working with Terraform. However. Ansible's setup is also straightforward. The basic installation process is quick and effortless.

I recommend using both Ansible and Terraform for automation, especially now that both are under IBM.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.