On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 4:56 PM, Erik Dalén <[email protected]>wrote:

> Any plan of implementing caching for 1.7?
>
> "Starting with Facter 1.7.0, you can now specify that the contents of a
> fact’s “setcode” block should be cached for faster retrieval."
>
> Quote from http://docs.puppetlabs.com/guides/custom_facts.html
>
>
Unfortunately, as Adrien said, the caching didn't make it in. There is a
way of doing it with the external facts that are part of 1.7:
http://projects.puppetlabs.com/projects/facter/wiki/CachingExternalFacts

And of course there is the other answer :) Patches welcome :)


> --
> Erik Dalén
>
>
> On Friday 2 November 2012 at 16:47, Andy Parker wrote:
>
> > Right now facter has a branch called 2.x, which was supposed to be
> getting ready for a 2.0.0 release of facter. That hasn't happened yet and
> there are quite a few changes on the 2.x branch (and master since there are
> no differences between the two). I'd really like to see those changes be
> released and after looking over them I think we should release most, but
> not all, of those changes as a Facter 1.7.0.
> >
> > In my analysis of the changes between the 1.6.x branch and the 2.x
> branch I found:
> > * external facts (new feature, backwards compatible)
> > * whitespace stripping (new feature, backwards incompatible)
> > * various new facts (backwards compatible)
> > * removal of the memorytotal fact (backwards incompatible)
> > * removal of the iphostnumber fact (backwards incompatible)
> > * changes to the memory facts (backwards incompatible)
> >
> > So the plan would be to make a 1.7.x branch off of master and revert
> those backwards incompatible changes. Remove the 2.x branch and have
> development toward Facter 2 take place on master.
> >
> > However, even with that, there would need to be some QA and testing love
> given to the 1.7.x branch. I can make the branch and revert the obviously
> problematic changes, but I'd really like some help on trying it out and
> getting it in shape for a release. Other ways people could help out would
> be to work out a way of making some of those changes not be backwards
> incompatible (for instance the changes to the memory facts could probably
> be fixed up).
> >
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Puppet Developers" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected](mailto:
> [email protected]).
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected] (mailto:
> [email protected]).
> > For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en.
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Puppet Developers" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected].
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en.

Reply via email to