Response inline.
On Monday, 24 June 2013 11:59:06 UTC+10, Michael Dodwell wrote:
>
> Take a look at http://docs.puppetlabs.com/guides/custom_functions.html you
> could write your own fuctions to give you something like this.
>
> Thanks Michael.
I was hoping to add such a functionality to Puppet.
> Puppet hasn't really been designed to be low overhead (with more of a
> focus on simplicity) and i think the least of it's performance problems
> come from the fact that it uses an external fork for exec checks.
>
I hope that's not Puppetlabs' view on performance. Performance and resource
optimisation should be up there at the top of the feature list just like
security.
> On Sunday, June 23, 2013 8:39:57 PM UTC+10, Amos Shapira wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> A little annoyance about "exec" that bothers me is that there is no way
>> to use "unless"/"onlyif" except with external commands, even if a simple
>> Ruby function could be used to execute the test.
>>
>> e.g. "onlyif => 'test -d /data'" will fork and exec "test" to do a simple
>> stat(2) which can be done with much less overhead with Ruby's
>> "File.directory?('/data')".
>>
>> How about allowing passing a none-string value to Exec's onlyif/unless
>> attributes, and consider that as the result? If it's a string then it will
>> be treated as today, otherwise it will be treated as a boolean.
>>
>> I don't think this will break any backward compatibility since all Exec's
>> currently expect strings to execute.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> --Amos
>>
>>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" 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-users.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
