On Monday, December 3, 2012 9:54:49 PM UTC+11, Andrew Beresford wrote:
>
> Feature :)

 
I do understand what the code is doing but question whether that's what it 
should be doing.  While it's ultimately a matter of opinion, it violates 
the 'principle of least surprise' for me and also my Solaris colleagues.

At any rate, I finally managed to find a multi-core linux box I could try 
this on and have confirmed that the associated linux facts behave in the 
way I would have expected them to on Solaris -

physicalprocessorcount => 1
processor0 => Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2600 CPU @ 3.40GHz
processor1 => Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2600 CPU @ 3.40GHz
processor2 => Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2600 CPU @ 3.40GHz
processor3 => Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2600 CPU @ 3.40GHz
processor4 => Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2600 CPU @ 3.40GHz
processor5 => Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2600 CPU @ 3.40GHz
processor6 => Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2600 CPU @ 3.40GHz
processor7 => Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2600 CPU @ 3.40GHz
processorcount => 8

This is a 4-core CPU with 8 threads.  

See the spec for the i7-2600
http://ark.intel.com/products/52213

So I do think the Solaris behaviour is in error.

Maybe we need a 'processorcorecount' fact instead?

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Users" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/oCN9JSsfcsgJ.
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-users?hl=en.

Reply via email to