Josh Smift wrote: > MT> We all know the shortcomings of the idea and agree with it being a > MT> "not best practice" :) > > Well, I don't. :^) Seriously, I'm surprised that you apparently got so > much negative reaction. If you want to manage most of the files on the > system with one instance of Cfengine, and you want to let some DBAs manage > some Oracle-related files with another instance, and I want to manage my > home directory with another instance, I don't see any obvious reason why > we couldn't do that. What am I missing?
It is rather easy and straightforward to have several instances of Cfengine manage different things, but there is no mechanism whereby the different instances can learn about each others' existence. In the case where two instances manage the same resource, they will "fight" about its content. Cfengine will not have any problem with "fighting" -- it is designed for this possibility -- but fighting will lead to instability that will show up in the change logs. Conversely, if one merges the two configurations into one file, Cfengine can detect *some* of the conflicts automatically, and resolve them without instability. It seems like for your stated use, two instances are better than one. In fact, I often recommend that people use multiple instances rather than trying to merge them, *especially* if two admins' domains of responsibility are different. -- Dr. Alva L. Couch Assoc. Prof. of Computer Science Tufts University Medford, MA 02155 http://www.cs.tufts.edu/~couch _______________________________________________ bblisa mailing list [email protected] http://www.bblisa.org/mailman/listinfo/bblisa
