I'm open to the idea of parse_yaml_from_file caching small files in memory
if vault decoded.





On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:33 PM, Serge van Ginderachter <
[email protected]> wrote:

> I have a couple of patches in queue that might help on this (though not
> the core issue if the extra time is due to vault):
>
>    https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pulls/sergevanginderachter
>
> especially this one:
>
>    https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/6734
>
> Can you test this patch set? You could also test with my 'integration'
> branch that has all those pathches merged in with 1.7 devel (currently last
> updated some weeks ago).
>
>    https://github.com/sergevanginderachter/ansible/tree/INTEGRATION
>
> Given you load the encrypted file as a var file, it might not address your
> use case, but it might help loading 110 yaml files (assuming those are
> primarily group/host_vars files.
>
>
>    Serge
>
>
>
>
> On 5 June 2014 19:07, <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> >Are all of the files you're referencing vault-encrypted, or does the
>> slowness come from the initialization of the VaultLib?
>>
>>  Only one file is vault encrypted, but (almost) every role references it
>> as a vars file. I don't know which part in particular is slow; I noticed
>> the delay after an open() on the vault file when stracing ansible and then
>> just confirmed it decrypted the file each time without digging any further.
>>
>>
>> > It might be better to cache that object based on the encryption method
>> and/or hashed password rather than the unencrypted contents of the YAML
>> files themselves.
>>
>> The choice to cache the parsed YAML rather than something lower down the
>> chain was made because that avoided the most work for ansible and, since I
>> know YAML files don't changes during execution, seemed safe. An initial
>> attempt only cached the decryption result, which already improved speeds
>> considerably but was still about three times as slow as caching the lot.
>>
>> I just tried caching only the VaultAES256 object instead of the above
>> approach, but that made no difference to the start up time.
>>
>>  --J
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Ansible Project" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to [email protected].
>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ansible-project/a252a080-a0e6-40da-9467-3359e91f93c3%40googlegroups.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ansible-project/a252a080-a0e6-40da-9467-3359e91f93c3%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>>
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Ansible Development" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
>
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Ansible Project" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ansible-project/CA%2BnsWgxYCuQ_e48W2x7FS9Rcn%3DGfbuVFGcOH2Bd82Yp7WSs06A%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to