On Thursday, 16 April 2015 14:01:29 UTC+2, henrik lindberg wrote: > > On 2015-16-04 4:30, Bostjan Skufca wrote: > > Just recently I was looking at the environments part of puppet > > implementation, and I have stumbled upon this curious gimmick. > > > > There is Puppet::Environments class, which is a class for general > > Environments management (searching, loaders, caching, etc). > > Then there is Puppet::Node::Environment which is instantiated for every > > environent found. Logical up to this point. > > > > But, contrary to all OOP notions, get_conf() function is not a method of > > Puppet::Node::Environment class. > > Rather, it is a lookup function in Puppet::Environments class which > > takes environment name as an argument and fetches > > Puppet::Settings::EnvironmentConf instance. > > > > Puppet::Environments has two function for environment and environment > > data retrieval: > > - get() fetches Puppet::Node::Environment instance > > - get_conf() fetches Puppet::Settings::EnvironmentConf instance > > > > The curious thing is: > > - get() method operates with cache > > - get_conf() does not include any caching > > > > I tested this on a catalog of 1633 resources, and: > > - get() was called around 220 times > > - get_conf() was called around 25.000 times > > > > These are the comments above get_conf() in environments.rb: > > # This implementation evicts the cache, and always gets the current > > # configuration of the environment > > # > > # TODO: While this is wasteful since it > > # needs to go on a search for the conf, it is too disruptive to > > optimize > > # this. > > > > My questions are: > > - why does get_conf() method belong to Environments instead of > > Node::Environment class? > > - why are get_conf() results not cached? Why is it "too disruptive"? > > > > It should be fine to cache the env conf in an instance of an > environment, and it should be possible to obtain the config given > an instantiated environment. This is safe since the conf will then be > evicted when the environment is evicted (and while the environment is > cached it will not reload or change).
It would be more logical that way too, for the user. If there is "environment timeout", user would expect that all parts of environment (env configuration, code, even manifests) are cached. At least that was my understanding until I actually looked at the code. Shall I create a Jira ticket and pull request with working code change? > I believe that the large number of calls > to get the conf could almost exclusively be for an already loaded > environment (I should be measured though). > Yes, this is true. All the calls are for the environment where the node/agent resides. I tested this with single node only, though. > All other calls would be for information purposes and those cannot be > cached unless the environment.conf file is watched (which is difficult > since it may not exist, come into existence, be removed etc.). For those > calls, the cost of checking if the file is up to date is almost as > expensive as loading the conf. > "All other calls" - do you mean calls for other environments? If so, as said above, I did not notice this on my setup (could not). But I believe that if env caching follows the same pattern for all environments, it should not be a problem. Since the 3.x implementation is very complex due to the dynamic > environments, I suggest that this should be fixed for 4.x. > This is probably for the best, true. If one wants to refrain from using dynamic environments and wishes to use 3.7.x, a separate patch may be provided. b. -- 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/57e71df8-0a83-4cd7-a851-6f2fc2e0954c%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
