I used the solution to transform my infrastructure into code.
Chef PAYG
Progress Software CorporationExternal reviews
3 reviews
from
External reviews are not included in the AWS star rating for the product.
Easy to use and easily automates all the code and infrastructure
What is our primary use case?
What is most valuable?
The solution is easy to use and learn, and it easily automates all the code and infrastructure. The solution quickly automates development in a cloud environment and provides flexibility for selecting multiple clouds in infrastructure. The solution is easy to use.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I never faced issues with the solution’s stability.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Chef is a scalable solution.
What other advice do I have?
I've worked with the solution during my three months of internship and in my self-made project. I would recommend the solution to other users.
Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.
The solution can be used by people who want to do configuration management with infrastructure as a code
What is our primary use case?
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.
What is most valuable?
Chef is a great tool for an automation person who wants to do configuration management with infrastructure as a code.
What needs improvement?
Chef does not support the containerized things of Chef products. In the future, Chef could develop a docker container or docker images.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Chef for four years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I rate Chef a nine out of ten for stability.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Thousands of customers are using the solution.
I rate Chef a nine out of ten for scalability.
How are customer service and support?
The solution's technical support team is really good, and you can directly contact them regarding any issues.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
How was the initial setup?
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.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Chef is priced based on the number of nodes.
What other advice do I have?
Overall, I rate Chef a nine out of ten.
The product has an old technology, though it is useful for automating processes
What is our primary use case?
We were using the tool for managing Kubernetes.
What is most valuable?
The product is useful for automating processes.
What needs improvement?
I did not like the solution. It is an old technology. Compared to Ansible, it just doesn't hold up because we need to deploy a client to each of the services we need to manage, which makes the automation much harder.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
The tool was fairly stable.
How was the initial setup?
The product was deployed on the cloud.
What other advice do I have?
I would not recommend the solution to others. It depends entirely on how someone’s system is made, but still, I would probably suggest something else entirely. Overall, I rate the tool a four or five out of ten.
Easy configuration management, optimization abilities, and complete infrastructure and application automation
What is our primary use case?
Chef is like a master chef in a kitchen for computer systems. It's used to create recipes (cookbooks) that specify how servers and apps should be set up. Chef then makes sure these instructions are followed the same way on all computers in a network. The ChefServer is like the recipe book, where all these instructions are kept and shared, making it easier to manage and control how software and systems work in a company.
What is most valuable?
The most valuable feature is its easy configuration management, optimization abilities, complete infrastructure and application automation, and its superiority over other similar tools. It smoothly integrates with CI processes and helps reduce manual errors in system management and configuration. It is an effective and user-friendly tool for automating IT infrastructure and applications.
What needs improvement?
In terms of improvement, Chef could get better by being more widely available, adapting to different needs, and providing better documentation. There is also an issue with shared resources like cookbooks lacking context, which could lead to problems when multiple companies use them. Chef should aim for wider availability, better flexibility, clearer documentation, and improved management of shared resources to prevent conflicts. Many companies are now moving to Ansible, so I would recommend better documentation, easier customer use, and simpler integration. I have concerns about the complexity of migrating to different servers and would prefer a simpler process.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Chef for almost a year.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I would rate the stability of the solution an eight out of ten.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Approximately 16 people use Chef at our company.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
Ansible has more advanced features than Chef. Ansible is easy to install, highly scalable, excels in orchestration and streamlined provisioning, and is easy to deploy. However, I cannot decide whether I prefer Ansible or Chef.
What other advice do I have?
Overall, I would rate Chef a seven out of ten.
showing 1 - 4