A comparison of the configuration management tools Puppet and CFEngine.

1. Puppet vsCFEngine
While most people think of Puppet and Chef when they’re thinking about Configuration
Management tools, other alternatives exist. One notable example is CFEngine. In this
post, we’ll compare Puppet to this older, more established configuration management
tool.
CFEngine is actually significantly older than Puppet or Chef, dating back to 1993. It was
created by Mark Burgess and, like Puppet, started out as an open-source configuration
management tool, not an an enterprise Configuration Management product. It wasn’t
commercialized in 2008. CFEngine has been described as the grandfather of
configuration management tools.
So how do CFEngine and Puppet differ from one another?

2. Complexity and Power
While Puppet is heralded to be more “Ops-friendly”, due to its model-driven approach
and relatively small learning curve, CFEngine resides more in the “Dev-friendly” side of
the spectrum.
CFEngine runs on C, as opposed to Puppet’s use of Ruby. C is the more low level of the
two languages, and one of the main complaints regarding CFEngine is that the learning
curve is very steep. It does mean though that CFEngine has a dramatically smaller
memory footprint, it runs faster and has far fewer dependencies.
Puppet’s model-driven approach means a smaller learning curve, which makes it a
preferred option for sysadmins with limited coding experience. The model-driven
approach also takes on a lot of the responsibility for dependency management. Some
argue that this can result in unexpected behaviour though and has its limits.
Platforms
Puppet’s edge here is avoiding specific nuances across operating systems, which exist
when using CFEngine. However, Puppet and CFEngine have excellent support across
platforms.
CFEngine’s supported platforms
Puppet’s supported platforms
Community
Puppet and CFEngine both have strong user communities, as they are both mature
tools. CFEngine has a strong international presence, headquartered in Oslo, with
several US offices as well.
CFEngine’s site claims that they currently manage more than 10 million nodes. Puppet is
less specific about exactly how many servers their software runs on, but they have an
impressive list of customers.
Documentation

3. Both Puppet and CFEngine have moved past early missteps (or lack of focus) on the
documentation front. Both have online references available:
CFEngine Reference Doc
Puppet Reference Doc
Whatever your choice it is always wise to look to third party reference material to get a
full appreciation of the power and nuances of each tool.
Learning CFEngine
Automating Linux and Unix System Administration
Pro Puppet
Puppet 2.7 Cookbook
Pricing
Naturally, due to its open-source origins, CFEngine (like Puppet) has a free open-source
version available. Puppet’s Enterprise edition provides 10 free nodes, and then charges
$99 per node per year (with bulk discounts available). CFEngine’s pricing after the 25
free nodes is unspecified, they require you to contact a sales representative for more
pricing information – they offer “promotional pricing” based off of a client’s particular
needs.
One key benefit of CFEngine’s pricing model appears to be that its pricing is more
customizable to a company’s specific needs. CFEngine also offers significantly more
free nodes than does Puppet.
Conclusion
At a high level if coding and complexity doesn’t scare you, if small agent footprints and
speed matter and you’ll take control and scale over simplicity then CFEngine may be for
you. If the relatively smoother onboarding and simpler model driven approach is more
attractive then Puppet may well be for you. As always, both tools are available to trial at

4. no cost so if you have the time choose a representative (if modest) configuration to
automate using each and compare and contrast. Nothing beats hands on experience.