Continuous configuration automation (CCA) is the methodology or process of automating the deployment and configuration of settings and software for both physical and virtual data center equipment.[1]
Overview
editContinuous configuration automation is marketed for data center and application configuration management. CCA tools use a programmable framework for configuration and orchestration through coding, planning, and incrementally adopting policies.[2][3]
Relationship to DevOps
editCCA tools are used for what is called DevOps, and are often included as part of a DevOps toolchain. CCA grew out of a push to develop more reliable software faster.[1] Gartner describes CCA as “Embodying lean, agile and collaborative concepts core to DevOps initiatives, CCA tools bring a newly found level of precision, efficiency and flexibility to the challenges of infrastructure and application configuration management.” [4]
Tools
editCCA tools support administrators and developers to automate the configuration and Orchestration of physical and virtual infrastructure in a systematic way that give visibility to state of infrastructure within an enterprise. Generally thought of as an extension of infrastructure as code (IaC) frameworks.[1] CCA tools include Ansible, Chef software, Otter, Puppet (software), Rudder (software) and SaltStack.[5] Each tool has a different method of interacting with the system some are agent-based, push or pull, through an interactive UI. Similar to adopting any DevOps tools, there are barriers to bring on CCA tools and factors that hinder and accelerate adoption.[6]
Notable CCA tools include:
| Tool | Developed by | Initial release | Method | Approach | Written in |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ansible | Red Hat | 2012 | Push | Declarative and imperative | Python |
| CFEngine | Northern.tech | 1993 | Pull | Declarative | C[7] |
| Chef | Progress | 2009 | Pull | Imperative | Ruby |
| Otter | Inedo | 2015 | Push | Declarative and imperative | - |
| Puppet | Puppet | 2005 | Pull | Declarative | C++, Clojure since 4.0, Ruby |
| Salt | VMware | 2011 | Push and Pull | Declarative and imperative | Python |
| Terraform | HashiCorp | 2014 | Push | Declarative | Go |
Evaluation factors
editEvaluations of CCA tools may consider the following:[8][9]
- Skills, training, and cost required to implement and maintain tool
- Content and support of the Platform and Infrastructure – tool specified for Windows or Linux etc.
- Delivery method and likening flexibility – important for scalability
- Method of interacting with managing system
- Support and training availability and cost
- Incorporation of orchestration with configuration management
- Security and compliance reporting
See also
editReferences
edit- ^ a b c Fletcher, Colin; Cosgrove, Terrence (26 August 2015). Innovation Insight for Continuous Configuration Automation Tools. Gartner (Report).[dead link]
- ^ Ramos, Martin (4 November 2015). "Continuous Integration: Infrastructure as Code in DevOps". easydynamics.com. Archived from the original on 6 February 2016. Retrieved 11 May 2016.
- ^ Infrastructure As Code: Fueling the Fire for Faster Application Delivery (Report). Forrester. March 2015.
- ^ Phillips, Andrew (14 May 2015). "Moving from Infrastructure Automation to True DevOps". DevOps.com.
- ^ Venezia, Paul (21 November 2013). "Puppet vs. Chef vs. Ansible vs. Salt". Network World. Network World. Archived from the original on 18 July 2018. Retrieved 14 December 2015.
- ^ Garner Market Trends: DevOps – Not a Market, but Tool-Centric Philosophy That supports a Continuous Delivery Value Chain (Report). Gartner. 18 February 2015.
- ^ "CFEngine 3.18.0 Documentation - What is CFEngine?".
- ^ Fletcher, Colin; Cosgrove, Terrence (25 March 2016). How I&O teams can combine CCA tools With Containers to Achieve Operational Efficiecies. Gartner (Report).
- ^ Fletcher, Colin; Cosgrove, Terrence (8 December 2016). Market Guide for Continuous Configuration Automation Tools. Gartner (Report).