HashiCorp Consul vs. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Consul
Score 9.6 out of 10
N/A
HashiCorp Consul is a tool for discovering and configuring services in the IT infrastructure. It provides service discovery, health checking, key/value stores and support for multiple data centers out of the box.
$0
always free
Ansible
Score 9.2 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
HashiCorp ConsulRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Editions & Modules
Open Source (self-managed)
$0
always free
HCP Consul (Cloud)
$0.027/hr
Per Hour
Enterprise
Self-Managed Custom Deployments
Basic Tower
5,000
per year
Enterprise Tower
10,000
per year
Premium Tower
14,000
per year
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
ConsulAnsible
Free Trial
YesNo
Free/Freemium Version
YesNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeOptionalNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
HashiCorp ConsulRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Features
HashiCorp ConsulRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Configuration Management
Comparison of Configuration Management features of Product A and Product B
HashiCorp Consul
-
Ratings
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform
8.6
Ratings
7% above category average
Infrastructure Automation00 Ratings9.20 Ratings
Automated Provisioning00 Ratings8.80 Ratings
Parallel Execution00 Ratings8.80 Ratings
Node Management00 Ratings8.40 Ratings
Reporting & Logging00 Ratings7.80 Ratings
Version Control00 Ratings8.70 Ratings
Best Alternatives
HashiCorp ConsulRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

HashiCorp Terraform
HashiCorp Terraform
Score 8.5 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.3 out of 10
HashiCorp Terraform
HashiCorp Terraform
Score 8.5 out of 10
Enterprises
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.3 out of 10
HashiCorp Terraform
HashiCorp Terraform
Score 8.5 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
HashiCorp ConsulRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Likelihood to Recommend
8.1
(0 ratings)
9.5
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
Usability
10.0
(0 ratings)
7.3
(0 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
8.7
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.8
(0 ratings)
7.3
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
8.2
(0 ratings)
Ease of integration
-
(0 ratings)
8.6
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
HashiCorp ConsulRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Likelihood to Recommend
Consul looks to me like an amazing solution to store configuration data. In huge cloud environments like what we are using nowadays, it is quite important to have a reliable source of parameters to our distributed applications, easily scalable and also, easy to change parameters spreading them efficiently over our entire environment.
Read full review
I'm going to say it is best suited for configuration management. Like I said, patching even with security, things of that nature. Probably less suited is hardware management, but Red Hat IBM/IBM has Terraform for that. So it's a trade off.
Read full review
Pros
  • Service Health: Using Consul for service health/discovery has been critical to our success in a hybrid environment
  • K/V Store: The Consul K/V store is the best solution out there for our particular use case, which is as a locking mechanism to coordinate otherwise random runs of our configuration management system. This has allowed us to have peace of mind of system availability in our on-prem infrastructure.
  • API: The Consul API as a whole is excellent and extremely easy to work with
  • Documentation: Hashicorp really does documentation well. Their examples are easy to follow and everything is written in a manner that is easy to understand for beginners with the tool.
Read full review
  • Debugging is easy, as it tells you exactly within your job where the job failed, even when jumping around several playbooks.
  • Ansible seems to integrate with everything, and the community is big enough that if you are unsure how to approach converting a process into a playbook, you can usually find something similar to what you are trying to do.
  • Security in AAP seems to be pretty straightforward. Easy to organize and identify who has what permissions or can only see the content based on the organization they belong to.
Read full review
Cons
  • Error logs - some of the errors require Googling as you have no idea what they mean
  • Misconfiguration is painful - strange errors can occur if you make even a tiny mistake
Read full review
  • Ability to tell when a task has already been done
  • yaml configuration can be annoying at times, perhaps a built in lint so yq isn't needed
  • the become feature should be able to be set to true globally without using args
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
No answers on this topic
Even is if it's a great tool, we are looking to renew our licence for our production servers only. The product is very expensive to use, so we might look for a cheaper solution for our non-production servers. One of the solution we are looking, is AWX, free, and similar to AAP. This is be perfect for our non-production servers.
Read full review
Usability
Consul's API is extremely user friendly. While their web interface isn't quite as "mature", it's still pretty easily navigated for the average person. Together they make a pretty easy to pick up and use tool.
Read full review
Overall it's good but the new architecture can be complex. Improvements can be made in the Config as Code capabilities for managing Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform. Sometimes it can be difficult for those unfamiliar to understand the relationship between Projects/Credentials/Job Templates, etc.
Read full review
Performance
No answers on this topic
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.
Read full review
Support Rating
I've never used paid support from HashiCorp, but I consider its support a good one, since they provide a lot of free resources for the community and there are good user groups supporting you on several sorts of issues. Also, HashiCorp is known as a company with a strong relationship with the community, that is easily noticed by the events HashiCorp promotes over the world.
Read full review
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.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
No answers on this topic
I spoke on this topic today!
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
We used to use Microsoft SQL Server for configuration management of our services. Unfortunately that was a pain because of:
  • Developers did not know how to persist objects effectively in MS SQL Server
  • SQL queries or a custom web UI were the ways of keeping the data up to date, but both options were hard to use
  • Each service would have its own slightly different configuration in a file and in MS SQL Server so that caused a lot of confusion and configuration management overhead
Consul brought the following benefits:
  • Its own modern web UI
  • Streamlined use of objects and multiple different configuration (JSON-based)
  • Service DNS vs IP addresses is a God-send for the dev and operations teams.
Read full review
As I said earlier, Red Hat Ansible remains a top choice because it is a perfect combination of multiple capabilities. Terraform is good in IAC but not in config automation. Puppet is well-suited for developers, but not for system administrators and infrastructure integrators. OpenShift and Kubernetes are generic automators only.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • It contains a native web UI, which in contrast to its counterparts, is handy, very intuitive and - most importantly - very informative. It leaves no room for doubt about your services "forest" health. So, for that purpose, the learning curve was almost down to non-existent. Our team managed to work seamlessly with Consul being our services API
  • Our management staff had a difficult time understanding what Consul was really all about. For technical staff it is pretty simple to understand the huge value such a tool can pose to our suite of solutions, but once our management staff took the grasp of its valuable handy set of tools, we didn't take long to start using it and keeping track of our Swarm overall health, with was a constant concern for the entire company before.
  • For load balancing purposes, we were relying pretty much on guesses before we decided to use Consul. One would check a certain node overall health and decide if we would need to spring a new instance at AWS or Digital Ocean.
Read full review
  • We are still early in our implementation and don't have much yet - but I can say that it has already improved the time it takes to deploy a new virtual server for us, as well as making them more consistent.
  • In working through what jobs are required, it has really improved the communication between our different teams
Read full review
ScreenShots

Consul Screenshots

Screenshot of Screenshot of