Puppet is pretty scalable — so far. Currently, we have 400 servers that are communicating with Puppet, pulling policies every 15 minutes. It gets sluggish sometimes, but a single server has been able to manage all of this. I think if we get to more than 500 VMs, we might have to add more servers. Currently, I think we have a very small setup. I think it's more than good for us.

Puppet Enterprise is a scalable solution. We usually recommend Puppet Enterprise for larger companies that have mature CI/CD structures and image management processes.

The solution is highly scalable out-of-the-box. It is able to be scaled vertically and horizontally, even use specific Federated Architecture to be able to have Regional coverage.

The solution’s scalability is good. We are using 500 nodes.

Most of our clients are enterprise companies. A lot of clients that we work with are from the banking, financial, and insurance industry. We've also done some public work in the telecoms industry.

No problems.

Scalability-wise, we tried going with the two nodes for high availability purposes. In terms of clients, as far as the endpoint, you can add as many as you want. The versatility is also good. You can have different types of endpoints from the app ranging from application to the network devices, to Linux servers, to Windows servers. Everything can be added on. It's good. The scalability is fine.

Well, if you are going bigger, you need to have more master servers and perform a low balancing from the servers. Also, yes, I feel like the kind of example, there's a limit of nodes that can be managed from one server. So I don't remember exactly how many. But if you need to add more nodes, you need to deploy another server into a trust relationship. Then you can deploy more nodes. I've had no issues with that.

I haven't gone too big. So I'm only working with one master.

I have not encountered any issues with scalability.