The release of sshsync, a new command-line tool for managing multiple SSH connections, has sparked a lively debate among system administrators and DevOps professionals about its utility compared to established solutions like Ansible. The Python-based tool, which allows users to run shell commands across multiple remote servers concurrently, has received mixed reactions from the technical community.
Tool Redundancy vs. Specialized Use Cases
The primary criticism leveled against sshsync centers on perceived redundancy. Many commenters questioned the need for another SSH management tool when robust solutions like Ansible, pssh, or even basic shell scripts with SSH and SCP already exist. One commenter noted that setting up SSH keys and inventory with Ansible takes 10 minutes, even if you're doing it for the first time, suggesting that existing tools already solve the problems sshsync aims to address.
However, defenders of simpler tools like sshsync and pssh highlighted specific scenarios where lightweight alternatives shine. One user explained that tools like pssh offer advantages in certain environments:
The reasons I find it over Ansible are: takes the same syntax and options as plain SSH, just run over multiple hosts. So if you already know SSH, you know how to use it... doesn't require dependencies on the target machine. Ansible requires a python3 installation on the target machine. Something that is not granted in all settings (e.g. embedded devices).
This perspective highlights a genuine divide in the DevOps community between those who prefer comprehensive configuration management systems and those who value simpler, more focused tools for specific tasks.
Alternative SSH Management Tools Mentioned in Discussion:
- Ansible - Full configuration management system requiring Python on target machines
- pssh - Parallel SSH command execution tool with simple configuration
- Fabric - Python library for streamlining SSH usage
- pyinfra - Python-based infrastructure management tool
- GoSSHa - Go-based tool optimized for SSH agent forwarding at scale
- GNU Parallel - Tool for executing jobs in parallel
- PowerShell Invoke-Command - Windows-based remote command execution
Scale and Performance Considerations
An interesting technical insight came from a user who had built a similar tool for managing approximately 3,000 servers. They highlighted a specific technical challenge around SSH agent authentication at scale, noting that their Go-based solution allows you to do SSH agent forwarding that actually works at scale by limiting concurrency when communicating with the SSH agent.
This raises important questions about sshsync's performance capabilities. While the tool offers concurrent command execution across servers, the documentation doesn't address how it might perform with hundreds or thousands of connections—a common scenario in large enterprise environments.
Feature Gaps and Limitations
Several commenters identified functional limitations in sshsync that might hinder its adoption. One user asked about handling commands requiring user input, such as sudo password prompts. The developer acknowledged that there is no way to take user input in transit, meaning users would need to have passwordless sudo configured—a significant limitation for security-conscious environments.
Others suggested potential feature enhancements that could make the tool more attractive, such as adding filter parameters for cloud provider VMs, similar to what some users have implemented in their custom scripts.
Key Features of sshsync:
- Run shell commands concurrently across multiple servers
- Group-based configuration for targeting specific server sets
- Push/pull files between local and remote hosts
- Dry-run mode to preview actions before execution
- Uses existing SSH configuration from ~/.ssh/config
- No dependencies required on target machines
- Written in Python 3.10+
Developer Perspective
The creator of sshsync offered a refreshingly humble perspective on the project, acknowledging that it wasn't intended to compete with established tools. I was getting bored, this seemed like a cool project to work on outside of work, they explained, adding that a colleague found it useful, which prompted the public release.
This highlights an important aspect of open-source development—not every tool needs to revolutionize an industry. Sometimes projects serve as learning experiences, solve specific personal needs, or fill small niches that mainstream tools might overlook.
Despite some criticism about the AI-generated documentation and lack of research into existing solutions, the developer's candid response demonstrates the genuine spirit of sharing that drives much of the open-source community.
The discussion around sshsync reveals a broader tension in the DevOps world between comprehensive platforms and simpler, more focused tools. While Ansible offers a complete configuration management solution with extensive capabilities, tools like sshsync appeal to those seeking lightweight alternatives for specific tasks without the overhead of learning complex systems.
As one commenter pointedly observed, Ansible is one of the best examples of needless complexity I've ever interacted with—a sentiment that explains why simpler alternatives continue to emerge despite the maturity of the configuration management space.
Whether sshsync gains widespread adoption remains to be seen, but the conversation it has sparked highlights the ongoing need for tools that balance power with simplicity in today's increasingly complex IT environments.
Reference: sshsync