Ansible vs. Terraform: A Comparative Study on Infrastructure as Code (IaC) Efficiency in Enterprise IT
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63282/3050-9246.IJETCSIT-V4I2P105Keywords:
Infrastructure as Code (IaC), automation, Ansible, Terraform, configuration management, provisioning, DevOps, enterprise IT, cloud computing, scalability, orchestration, efficiency, security, compliance, CI/CD, multi-cloud, IaC best practicesAbstract
Infrastructure as Code (IaC) has changed corporate IT by allowing the automation of infrastructure provisioning, enhancing consistency & reducing human mistakes. Ansible and Terraform are among the most widely used Infrastructure as Code (IaC) technologies available. Although their methods, tools & the objectives differ, both strive to streamline the infrastructure management. Based on corporate acceptance, scalability, automation, and efficiency—key criteria—this paper evaluates Ansible and Terraform. Ansible is agentless in design and procedural approach so it excels in configuration management and application deployment. With its declarative language and state management, Terraform is designed for large-scale infrastructure provisioning very differently. This study looks at actual world use of these technologies to demonstrate how businesses optimize their IT systems. Based on the results, Terraform excels in the state management and infrastructure orchestration even if Ansible provides adaptability & the simplicity. The report also examines how businesses use various technologies—sometimes in the concert to strike the ideal mix between infrastructure automation & the configuration management. The paper also examines elements like learning curve, cost-effectiveness & the security concerns. Present processes, long-term scalability objectives & the corporate demands all influence the appropriate IaC technology that IT teams should adopt, hence this comparative research is rather important
Downloads
References
[1] Achar, Sandesh. "Enterprise saas workloads on new-generation infrastructure-as-code (iac) on multi-cloud platforms." Global Disclosure of Economics and Business 10.2 (2021): 55-74.
[2] Chinamanagonda, Sandeep. "Automating Infrastructure with Infrastructure as Code (IaC)." Available at SSRN 4986767 (2019).
[3] Murphy, Olga. "Adoption of Infrastructure as Code (IaC) in Real World; lessons and practices from industry." (2022).
[4] Chijioke-Uche, Jeffrey. Infrastructure as code strategies and benefits in cloud computing. Diss. Walden University, 2022.
[5] Callanan, Shane. "An industry-based study on the efficiency benefits of utilising public cloud infrastructure and infrastructure as code tools in the it environment creation process." (2018).
[6] Basher, Mohamed. "DevOps: An explorative case study on the challenges and opportunities in implementing Infrastructure as code." (2019).
[7] Sandobalin, Julio, Emilio Insfran, and Silvia Abrahao. "On the effectiveness of tools to support infrastructure as code:Model-driven versus code-centric." IEEE Access 8 (2020): 17734-17761.
[8] Omofoyewa, Yaqub, Andreas Grebe, and Philipp Leusmann. "IaC reusability for Hybrid Cloud Environment." 2021,
[9] Winkler, Scott. Terraform in Action. Simon and Schuster, 2021.
[10] Shirinkin, Kirill. Getting Started with Terraform. Packt Publishing Ltd, 2017.
[11] Sokolowski, Daniel. "Infrastructure as code for dynamic deployments." Proceedings of the 30th ACM Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering. 2022.
[12] Wang, Tony. "A Service for Provisioning Compute Infrastructure in the Cloud." (2019).
[13] Krief, Mikael. Learning devops: The complete guide to accelerate collaboration with jenkins, kubernetes, terraform and azure devops. Packt Publishing Ltd, 2019.
[14] Labouardy, Mohamed. Pipeline as code: continuous delivery with Jenkins, Kubernetes, and terraform. Simon and Schuster, 2021.
[15] Petrović, Nenad, Matija Cankar, and Anže Luzar. "Automated approach to iac code inspection using python-based devsecops tool." 2022 30th Telecommunications Forum (TELFOR). IEEE, 2022.
