HPE OneView is an IT infrastructure monitoring platform, from Hewlett-Packard Enterprise.
N/A
Ansible
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
The Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform (acquired by Red Hat in 2015) is a foundation for building and operating automation across an organization. The platform includes tools needed to implement enterprise-wide automation, and can automate resource provisioning, and IT environments and configuration of systems and devices. It can be used in a CI/CD process to provision the target environment and to then deploy the application on it.
$5,000
per year
Pricing
HPE OneView
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Basic Tower
5,000
per year
Enterprise Tower
10,000
per year
Premium Tower
14,000
per year
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
HPE OneView
Ansible
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
HPE OneView
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Considered Both Products
HPE OneView
No answer on this topic
Ansible
Verified User
Engineer
Chose Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Ansible is much easier than Puppet, more enterprises are switching from Puppet to Ansible due to ease of use. Ansible has integration modules which allow you to transition from Puppet or Chef to Ansible. IT Automation space has a CAGR of 200%+ what are you doing to not get left …
HPE Oneview has come along way. When they first put it out it was next to useless. Over the years and versions, they listened to feedback and have made OneView into a truly enterprise-level robust management product. It is now a far better product than the old C7000 Blade OAs, and HP SIM. It makes management of hardware easy and makes much of the maintenance easier and safer than before. For the storage side it does a great job and is intuitive to use, but the very versatility of how you can do things can lead to issues if multiple engineers do things differently.
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is well suited to ensure that systems are in a specific state - when it is run against those systems. More tooling in the area of periodic scanning would be helpful for compliance folks. In addition, it would be helpful to be able to import a profile to use as a baseline and derive playbooks based on those. One should not necessarily rely on Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform to keep a device from drifting. It is not a Tripwire that will detect and revert a change quickly. However, it could do well if used for periodic scans. Event-driven Ansible shows promise. If it is better integrated with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform in terms of things like the approach to variables it could become more widely used more quickly.
For example, when we want to do a deployment of a new software agent or a new piece of code it also helps us to offload tasks to junior team members to where we can just put a series of complicated steps into a playbook and hand it off to an operator level person to coordinate and deploy. Like if it requires an outage or something, they just can focus on coordinating a schedule for doing it, but not on the technical aspects of the task.
Managing the 3Pard Oneview will allow you to do things like reuse LUN IDs and setup multiple export groups with the same volume. This can cause performance issues, or worse. They could do a better job of protecting you from yourself...
Workflows should have more flexible paths than just success or failure.
The upgrade process can be challenging with differences in security and environment.
There is an opportunity to add CICD functionality into the tool.
For development, it would be nice to have the option of editing a repo directly from AAP to allow quick tests/reruns. Then, allow it to push the updates back or create a new branch/PR in GitHub.
The RBAC is good but could use improvements. One example would be an option that allows admins to assume the access of another user to validate it works as expected.
Great in almost every way compared to any other configuration management software. The only thing I wish for is python3 support. Other than that, YAML is much improved compared to the Ruby of Chef. The agentless nature is incredibly convenient for managing systems quickly, and if a member of your term has no terminal experience whatsoever they can still use the UI.
Support and training when we implemented OneView were excellent. We haven't required any additional support since we put it in and configured it for our systems. The OneView systems have been stable through updates and HPE documentation is excellent.
There is a lot of good documentation that Ansible and Red Hat provide which should help get someone started with making Ansible useful. But once you get to more complicated scenarios, you will benefit from learning from others. I have not used Red Hat support for work with Ansible, but many of the online resources are helpful.
AAP doesn't truly stack up against any of the products mentioned except for Aria Automation. But, it is extensible and open and has a lower cost to entry.
