On 1 April 2014 15:59, Ken Barber <k...@puppetlabs.com> wrote: > > I... kinda like that suggestion. I would keep current behaviour intact, > so > > collection would work 'as expected though weirdly' and not break current > > manifests. People who are up to date on this can explicitly select an > > environment to collect. >
Well, it breaks resources that has a parameter called "environment". As this is a attribute on the resource object in puppetdb, not a resource parameter. In puppetdbquery I've been thinking about using a dot in front to query attributes of the object in question. So this would be .environment instead of environment (and then you can also search for things like sourceline using .sourceline etc) > > > > I also think that this approach works better for community modules. What > if > > your module ships with it's own native type and you want to collect on > > those? If you need to explicitly pass an environment for collection to > even > > work, what do you pass, 'production' and hope that everyone works from > that > > environment? > > This is a good point regarding "How do we expect environment > searchability to be applicable in modules?" This kind of feels like > the concept of baking in stages into modules. While on the surface > this might seem neat, does this create assumptions about how you build > out your environments into a module? > > >> This seems a bit backwards to me, for all other parts of the query you > >> just leave it out if you don't want to match on it. There's no need for > a > >> explicit tags=='*' if you want to match on all tags for example. So I > don't > >> see why environment matching would work the opposite way. > >> > >> So I'm proposing instead that you add environment==$::environment to > your > >> query if you want to collect only from your current environment. > > How would you do this with 3rd party modules though? Modify them? > Well, they can accept a collect_environment parameter that could default to '*' or so and use that in the query. > We need to be wary of people who do just want real separation, no one > has chimed in formally yet about this yet (this conversation has been > mainly on puppet-dev). > > ken. > > -- > 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 puppet-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-dev/CAE4bNTn%2B1cmhfLU1TqFcdDkFeX4htfz%3DG71RghxQk46Uk4qnyQ%40mail.gmail.com > . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- Erik Dalén -- 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 puppet-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-dev/CAAAzDLc_MKNQu-WRUPVda8yfg6gpqzuHTA%2BoXGNCG1p0M3OAcw%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
