What users are saying about
96 Ratings
4 Ratings
96 Ratings
<a href='https://www.trustradius.com/static/about-trustradius-scoring' target='_blank' rel='nofollow noopener noreferrer'>trScore algorithm: Learn more.</a>
Score 8.5 out of 101
4 Ratings
<a href='https://www.trustradius.com/static/about-trustradius-scoring' target='_blank' rel='nofollow noopener noreferrer'>trScore algorithm: Learn more.</a>
Score 8 out of 101

Likelihood to Recommend

Ansible

Great for automating groups of servers and ensuring updates are pushed to all of them (simultaneously if needed). It's hard to manage large groups of servers, and this tool makes it almost too simple. If there is only one server that is unique from the others, Ansible will not be as useful, but can still help track your changes.
Dylan Cauwels profile photo

Spinnaker

Spinnaker suits well for applications which are stateless and can adapt to an immutable architecture of deployment. But for applications which are stateful and cannot afford to spin up new servers for every deployment doesn't go well with Spinnaker. It can handle only deployments which are VM based and cannot support deployments to serverless architecture like AWS Lambda etc.
No photo available

Pros

Ansible

  • Agentless. For our implementation, this is the single biggest factor. If we have to touch the machine and install an agent before we can start managing it, that's already too much effort and slows us down.
  • Re-entrant. This is not unique to Ansible, but certainly a huge improvement over custom scripts and such. Because it's such a huge effort to make scripts re-entrant, most of our scripts did not allow an elegant way to recover on failure. Manually cleaning up the half-attempt and re-trying is still too cumbersome, and being able to just re-run Ansible is a great improvement!
  • Infrastructure as code. This is new to Ansible, and there are still a few minor bugs with their AWS modules, but it's been a huge help being able to define our infrastructure in an Ansible playbook, commit it to source control, and use one tool for all our DevOps tasks.
John Grosjean profile photo

Spinnaker

  • Spinnaker is very strong in its ability to baking of AMI(with ROSCO) and code deployments for Linux based ec2/AMI. Below are some more points:
  • Out of the box deployment strategies.
  • Open Source and active development.
  • Multi cloud deployments ( also can integrate with kubernetes)
  • Automated triggers.
  • Manual Judgements.
  • In-house bakery service, which helps in immutable deployments.
  • Easy pipeline setups using the UI , no need to write complex CFNs for code deployments.
  • "One click resize" of the underlying ec2s.
  • Exactly "one click rollback".
  • Pipelines can be scripted (SPEL)
  • Excellent search feature to search LBs , clusters etc from the UI.
  • Both high level and low level view of clusters, which has fine-grained options to control cloud infra from Spinnaker UI itself.
  • SSO and RBAC supported.
  • Wide range of deployment strategies like Blue-Green , Highlanders etc.
Debajit Kataki profile photo

Cons

Ansible

  • Unlike Chef, Ansible employes a Push methodology rather than Pull. We found that this doesn't scale well for us, thus we had to consider using Ansible Tower in order to scale.
  • Ansible's free training and tutorials do no provide as much depth and ease for first time users trying it out for the first time.
  • From the limited experience we have had with Ansible Tower, the UI is not very user friendly. There's a lot of bells and whistles that can prove o be overwhelming at times.
No photo available

Spinnaker

  • Spinnaker on its own has 10 underlying micro services. Managing Spinnaker needs a focussed platform approach
  • No support to deploy the artifacts without re-creating the servers. Only pure immutable deployment are allowed.
  • No authorization at pipelines level
No photo available

Performance

Ansible

Ansible 8.4
Based on 5 answers
Ansible is very friendly to start with. With just a few configurations, you have full management to your servers. You can configure it and implement it in seconds. You can also set up a cron job to make sure it gets implemented. It suits our need perfectly. Support can be a bit hard.
No photo available

Spinnaker

No score
No answers yet
No answers on this topic

Alternatives Considered

Ansible

Ansible is sufficient for our purposes because our configurations are relatively simple. Chef and Puppet would work better for more complex configurations. Also, our applications are deployed using Docker which simplifies our configuration requirements. An organization with more complex configurations would find Chef or Puppet suits their needs better.
Chien Huey profile photo

Spinnaker

We get a centralised view of all pipelines in single place. This helps for a large enterprise. Maven is very popular, so generating RPM from existing POM.xml is cool!
Debajit Kataki profile photo

Return on Investment

Ansible

  • We have been able to deploy solutions to client issues without impacting uptime.
  • Most system administration tasks have been automated so I am now free to work on architectural improvements or customer support.
  • Our customer support has improved thanks to Ansible as it has allowed me more time away from repetitive system activities so I may assist with customer questions and application testing.
James McCoy profile photo

Spinnaker

  • As we are using it on a large scale, hosting and maintaining it is affordable.
  • For few of the BU where there are fewer applications in Cloud. Hosting it and maintaining is an overhead and not very cost effective.
No photo available

Pricing Details

Ansible

General

Free Trial
Free/Freemium Version
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
Entry-level set up fee?
No

Spinnaker

General

Free Trial
Free/Freemium Version
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
Entry-level set up fee?
No

Add comparison