> Did a POC of it at my current company. I've also had the RedHat > Enterprise Deployment and Virtualization class. > > This product was originally envisioned began development before RedHat > even had an IPO. The reason I mention this is that the mindset around > systems management at that time is what you're getting with this > product. Which means it was designed for management types to be able > to say that everything is up to date and secure all the time. I don't > think they ever really fleshed it out as a systems management platform > in the first place. > > I have also seen RedHat Sales Techs that couldn't get the product > installed and required my assistance to get it running. > > The process of adding your own content to Satellite is one of the most > convoluted and time-intensive that I've seen. If you wish to add your > own packages, you must GPG all the packages and then find some way to > distribute your keys, which Satellite cannot do for you (this is > because the only way that would work through Satellite is if you > packaged your gpg key and had a post script to run the rpm --import, > but you can't do that because all your packages must be signed and > can't be installed if your gpg key hasn't already been imported. > > The program claims support for Solaris, but it is woefully inadequate > in a multitude of ways (esp. now with zones and containers) > > It was recently open-sourced, but they charge for the working version > because it is completely dependent on Oracle to run and the license is > for the embedded Oracle database that comes with it. I haven't seen > any progress making Satellite work on another RDBMS yet. > > The monitoring portion of the product is a joke and completely an > afterthought. It severely lacks any configurability or extensibility. > > The licensing scheme is insane. You need an "entitlement" to track > the box and manage packages. You need another to do automated > installs, and another to do monitoring. All of these are PER MACHINE. > > When I asked about scalability, I was told there were Satellite Proxy > servers, but they were really only to span physical locations, not > really to distribute load. When I asked if the product could be built > out in such a way as to manage 10K+ machines, they told me we should > pay them to maintain such a system for them. > > Even their instructors have been known to make veiled references to > the poor conception and implementation of the product. > > I was told there would be some major changes in a newer version, but I > believe we used 5.? in the class I took a little over a year ago. I'm > guessing the major changes they were talking about were making it open > source. > >
i have looked at it many moons ago when RH came in to install it for us - it was rubbish then and it still is, i was trying to manage ~4000 machines with it, I am revisiting spacewalk, opensourced satellite, as i need to be able to 'show' others that machines are up to date etc and for me spacewalk does this well. I will not however be using it to install any packages or configure machines. Cobbler, Puppet and yum does all that for me nicely. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
