HashiCorp Terraform Reviews

I use this solution for infrastructure for my projects that are deployed in Google Cloud. I work in EPA systems. 

The solution allows you to have infrastructure-like code which is basically what Terraform has been about. Terraform makes it easier to figure out the kind of problem that has occurred, why, and who was responsible.

Although using an older version, I've found the biggest advantage of Terraform is that it can be used across multiple cloud providers and multiple platforms and it has a simple API. 

The biggest disadvantage of Terraform is its lack of flexibility in common programming languages. It also lacks flexibility in creating some functions like complex expressions to declare random variables, and features that require any programming language. Those issues are because HashiCorp is trying to keep the API as simple as possible. I would like to see some idea of functional programming in Terraform. It would be great if you could process your data and push it back to the model. It would mean a huge improvement in flexibility. 

I've been using this solution for three years. 

The solution is stable and we haven't had any problems in that regard. 

The solution is scalable and we are constantly working on increasing of size of our infrastructure.

The initial setup is a little complex but not very difficult. Implementation time depends on the size of the deployment. Our deployment was carried out in-house. We need at least one person per 50 models of Terraform for implementation. 

We've had a return on our investment because it's decreased the overall ops overhead via the front team.

I am not using a payable Terraform although I'm quite familiar with the price and don't consider it to be expensive. Licensing costs are mid-range. 

I would suggest reading documentation and experimenting with the solution. 

I rate the solution 10 out of 10. 

I use the latest version. 

The solution allows us to work faster with ease and to set up new environments and workspaces. 

I would like to see a short-term option for a short-term plan. The last few versions contain plans with very long output which have since been altered. When one receives a plan involving many changes, it will not be applied. Even should nothing need apply, there is a very long history which is not really useful, as many find its application confusing. 

I have been using HashiCorp Terraform for around five years. 

The solution is pretty stable. I have no issues in this regard. 

The solution is pretty scalable. 

As the solution is open source, support is community based. 

There is a need for configuration management, for setting up the infrastructure from scratch. 

The set up process is pretty straightforward. 

The duration of the deployment varies with the project. Our company is involved in many projects. 

There are between one and five people who are responsible for maintaining the solution. 

I went with HashiCorp Terraform over that of CloudFormation, as the latter is complicated and hard to understand. HashiCorp Terraform was easier to learn across platforms, regions and multi-clouds. 

I use the latest version. It is important to try to not repeat oneself and to utilize the module provided by HashiCorp and others for training purposes. 

We use it to provision cloud infrastructure. We use it to provision all kinds of infrastructure from wherever we want, we Terraform to the cloud.

We provision new infrastructure, we update existing infrastructure with it, we manage our DNS records, and also deploy new applications on Kubernetes. That's the main use, but we use it for all of our infrastructures, so it has a lot of different use cases.

Before we used it, we were writing a lot of scripts to provision infrastructure and there weren't guidelines for anything on how to provision and how our environment will look. Now with Terraform, it's all templated and everyone in my team just uses modules that are templates, modules of Terraform, and all our environments look the same. It doesn't matter if it's dev, if it's QAs, if it's production, it looks the same. It just has different names and different types of machines. We want to pay less in the dev environments and QA but we want to have better performance in production. It's just the variable to change the type of machine that we want to use, but the template remains the same.

We save a lot of time with this solution. It also saves a lot of human errors and the whole team knows how to do the same thing.

The most valuable aspect of this solution is that it's agnostic. It can work with different cloud providers, which we may do in the future, so it benefits us. With not much change, I can deploy the same infrastructure to other cloud providers. Now we work with Azure but we can work with AWS or GCP and with minor changes we can deploy the same applications to other clouds. We can replicate the existing cases with minor changes and it's easily deployed.

It should have a more object-oriented approach like different coding languages.

It's really stable. We have no issues with it.

There are around five or six DevOps engineers who use this solution in my company. It's used on a daily basis. We use it for maybe 20% of our infrastructure, but we intend to use it for 100% all with Terraform.

I haven't needed to contact their technical support. 

We switched to Terraform because we wanted to minimize time and minimize human errors. We wanted to have alignment between all of our environments and really just development is faster.

We went with it because I had a really good experience with it in previous jobs.

The initial setup is straightforward. There are some things you need to understand to know if you want to make more complex templates but it's pretty straightforward. It's really flexible. 

Overall, the deployment takes around 15 minutes. 

It's open-source so it's free. 

My advice to someone considering this solution would be to work with the HashiCorp Best Practices of Terraform, work with Terraform modules, and write templates for everything. 

I would rate Terraform a nine out of ten. 

It is easy to architect cloud infrastructure using the solution. Also, its simple interface helps in developing specific scripts.

They should provide more tutorials to understand the solution's use cases. Also, they include more specific features into it.

I have been using the solution for three years.

It is a stable solution.

It is a scalable solution.

The solution's initial setup process is straightforward. It takes a couple of weeks to complete. Once you define everything, you can start working on it right away. The deployment happens almost immediately.

I recommend the solution to others. I rate it ten out of ten.

It enables us to create our cloud implementations without a technician needing to sign on to the cloud.

We are able to do multiple hybrid cloud implementations for clients that need to support Azure and AWS. 

It allows for the abstraction of the work away from the developer into automated processes. 

The reuse simplification is very good. 

It can enforce DevOps. 

It is stable. 

Technical support has been fine. 

The workflow and automation could be better.

The user interface could be easier for non-technical people. 

There's a learning curve involved with the setup; however, it is low to medium. 

I've used the solution for a long time. I've used it for 12 years at least. 

The stability is excellent. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

It's not a customer-facing solution. We've never had an issue with it. However, it is not a primary concern of ours in terms of the ability to expand. 

Most business analysts and sometimes architects use the solution. We have 1700 people in our organization, and we are doing 100 projects at a time. Almost all of the projects require the use of the product. Half of the people are engaged in the solution in one way or another. We have about 750 people using it. 

Technical support is very good. 

The initial setup is very simple for the most part. 

The pricing is expensive. It's more for enterprise implementations. The cost is above average in general. 

We're a consulting company. 

I'd advise other users to automate to the greatest extent possible to get the best ROI.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten, even though the workflow is not the strongest on the market. 

HashiCorp Terraform is a binary executable file, that you can download to your PC and manage any cloud solution in the world, such as Google Cloud Platform, Amazon AWS, OpenStack, CloudStack, or VMware. When you use DevOps in your company, it's a useful tool for it.

The most valuable features of HashiCorp Terraform are automation and management capabilities.

HashiCorp Terraform could improve the integration with the VCloud Director. When we manage the VCloud Director we end up wasting our time when creating virtual machines. HashiCorp Terraform knows about these issues and I think there might be a workaround but they should incorporate the fix in an upcoming release.

I have been using HashiCorp Terraform for approximately one year.

HashiCorp Terraform is a stable solution. We did not have any problems.

The scalability of HashiCorp Terraform is good.

I have not used the technical support from HashiCorp Terraform.

HashiCorp Terraform tool is pre-installed on our DevOps engineer's laptops, and in our GitLab Servers. We assign it to a selection of virtual machines. We just run it, and then we perform some functions, such as creating systems or modifying CPUs or RAM.

We did the implementation of HashiCorp Terraform in-house. We have a good team of three programmers and DevOps engineers with experience.

We used one engineer for the implementation of HashiCorp Terraform. 

HashiCorp Terraform is a free solution.

I rate HashiCorp Terraform a nine out of ten.

I use the solution to provision cloud resources on Azure, AWS, and GCP platforms.

What I like best is how easy the tool is to use. The HashiCorp Terraform language syntax is simple to learn. The Terraform.io registry feature is very useful - we can refer to our code and use pre-created modules posted there.

One area for improvement is real-time syncing with the actual infrastructure. Currently, you have to run CLI commands to sync the state file.

I have been using the product for two years. 

I rate the tool an eight out of ten. Sometimes, it can break down when handling too many resource creations at once due to dependency issues. 

I've contacted the support team a few times when getting errors.

Positive

The initial setup and deployment are also easy, especially when using the tool's code to deploy to cloud platforms.

The tool is worth the money. 

While it's easy to learn, you need experience with the HashiCorp Terraform language syntax to use it. I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten. 

HashiCorp Terraform does a good job and helps us set up all operations.

There are no specific valuable features as the whole product is good.

Terraform doesn't support Artifactory as a backend.

We have used this solution for about four years and are using the latest version.

It is a stable solution.

I am unsure about the scalability.

We have never used their technical support.

We have not used any other solutions.

I rate the solution a ten out of ten. HashiCorp Terraform is a rapid and promising tool.