Looks good from a cursory glance. Hopefully it's all working for you. On Apr 2, 2013, at 9:52 AM, Gavin Williams <[email protected]> wrote:
> As a quick update, I've pushed my latest set of code tweaks up - > https://github.com/fatmcgav/fatmcgav-netapp/commit/7a7d18bf39cdbb04a3b0b5192929ec6a857c0a5e > > Need to tidy the code up a bit, but should be able to get the gist :) Have > got a couple of defs which pull back the bulk of the information, and then a > couple that need to be called on a volume by volume basis. > All gets put together in instances, and provider'd up in prefetch. > > Comments welcome. > > Cheers > Gavin > > On Friday, 29 March 2013 13:15:12 UTC, Gavin Williams wrote: > Luke > > Cheers for that info, should prive useful... > > Guess I could implement a method for each property that pulls back all that > property values for all the volumes, and then match them up in prefetch. > > Cheers > Gav > > On 29 Mar 2013 12:49, "Luke Kanies" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Gavin, > > Yeah, there isn't as much consistency in API as I would like. > > The way it should work, I believe, is something like: > > * The Type should support an 'instances' method that returns a complete list > of all instances of that type that exist on the host itself. This method > should not require a catalog. > > * The provider should support a 'prefetch' method, which accepts a list of > resources from the catalog and updates them with the correct provider > instance, with appropriate data already filled in to reflect the system state. > > * Optionally, many providers implement (I think) their own 'instances' > method, which returns all instances and doesn't require a catalog, to > implement both of the above methods. > > I just looked at the Provider base class, though, and it's not at all clear > from this. Part of the problem is that the system is smart enough to skip > providers that don't support prefetch, and the way we denote 'doesn't support > prefetch' is that it doesn't have the method. Given that, I left the method > off of the base class. Because 'instances' isn't used for this kind of test, > the base class ships with a stub method that just throws an error. > > So yeah, all that's confusing, and could really use some additional work to > make it easier to understand, and to bring some consistency. > > On Mar 29, 2013, at 12:37 PM, fatmcgav <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Luke >> >> No worries. >> >> For the 2 I've converted soo far, it's made quite a performance difference. >> Thankfully can pull back all the resources with one NetApp api call, so it's >> drop the resource time from 5+ seconds to sub 1 second. >> However was a bit confused initially, as different providers seem to use >> different models... Some with just prefetch, some with just instances, some >> with both... >> >> However I'm just about to start the more complex netapp_volume provider, >> which has 4+ properties that have different api calls on top of the base >> resource list call. This is by far the slowest provider out of them with an >> average of 20+ seconds per run. >> So not sure of the best way to handle as yet. >> >> Cheers >> Gav >> >> On 29 Mar 2013 12:11, "Luke Kanies" <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi Gavin, >> >> I'm glad to see you've sorted it out, sorry I didn't jump in before it was >> all resolved. >> >> How has prefetching worked out for you, in terms of performance? >> >> On Mar 28, 2013, at 3:28 PM, Gavin Williams <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Afternoon >>> >>> Managed to find my issue.. Variable name re-use :( >>> >>> Defined 'qtrees' as an empty array on line 3, and then populated it with a >>> whole load of device output on line 18 :( >>> >>> So have defined a 'qtree_instances' array on the outside to contain my >>> output, with qtrees being used on the inside to hold the NetApp filer >>> response... Latest code in Github. >>> >>> Cheers >>> Gavin >>> >>> On Thursday, 28 March 2013 11:44:39 UTC, Gavin Williams wrote: >>> Morning all >>> >>> Quick update... Looks like I managed to hack around the issue by adding the >>> following: >>> >>> ... >>> ap qtree_info >>> >>> # Check if it is a NaElement >>> >>> >>> next unless qtree_info.respond_to?(:child_get_string) >>> >>> # Pull out the qtree name. >>> >>> >>> name = qtree_info.child_get_string("qtree") >>> ... >>> >>> However this shows that I'm getting a total of 78 items processed, whereas >>> the original array only contains 53 items... >>> The additional items being processed are all like: >>> '#<Puppet::Type::Netapp_qtree::ProviderNetapp_qtree:'. >>> Have updated the gist with latest code and log file. >>> >>> Would like to understand where these are coming from, and if it's something >>> I'm doing incorrectly? >>> >>> In the mean-time, following fixing that bug, the provider now seems to work >>> as expected :) >>> >>> Cheers >>> Gavin >>> >>> >>> On Wednesday, 27 March 2013 17:32:23 UTC, Gavin Williams wrote: >>> Afternoon all >>> >>> I've started working on converting a couple more of my NetApp network >>> device providers to use a prefetch/flush model, as can see performance >>> gains available, etc... >>> >>> Anyways, I'm having issues with my netapp_qtree provider. It would appear >>> that somehow, an additional Puppet::Type... row is getting into an array >>> and breaking things... >>> >>> Have created a gist here with the details, as the log file is quite long. >>> Also includes the instances and prefetch def's for my netapp_qtree >>> provider... >>> >>> As you can see on Line 337 of the log, the array contains 40 items, however >>> on line 734 self.instances is trying to process item 41?!?! >>> What's also strange is that the item contents look like a Puppet Type >>> (#<Puppet::Type::Netapp_qtree), whereas all the others in the array are >>> NetApp specific items (#<NaElement:). >>> >>> So, any ideas??? >>> >>> Cheers >>> Gavin >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "Puppet Developers" 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]. >>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Luke Kanies | http://about.me/lak | http://puppetlabs.com/ | +1-615-594-8199 >> Join us at PuppetConf 2013, August 22-23 in San Francisco - >> http://bit.ly/pupconf13 >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >> Google Groups "Puppet Developers" group. >> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/puppet-dev/74JW491YSAk/unsubscribe?hl=en. >> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >> [email protected]. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Puppet Developers" 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]. >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> >> > > > -- > Luke Kanies | http://about.me/lak | http://puppetlabs.com/ | +1-615-594-8199 > Join us at PuppetConf 2013, August 22-23 in San Francisco - > http://bit.ly/pupconf13 > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google > Groups "Puppet Developers" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/puppet-dev/74JW491YSAk/unsubscribe?hl=en. > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Puppet Developers" 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]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > -- Luke Kanies | http://about.me/lak | http://puppetlabs.com/ | +1-615-594-8199 Join us at PuppetConf 2013, August 22-23 in San Francisco - http://bit.ly/pupconf13 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Developers" 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]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
