[chef] Re: Fw: [[chef-dev]] Will attribute merge ordering fix for nested roles be merged in 0.10.0?


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Alex Soto < >
  • To:
  • Subject: [chef] Re: Fw: [[chef-dev]] Will attribute merge ordering fix for nested roles be merged in 0.10.0?
  • Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2011 18:17:46 -0700
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:mime-version:content-type:subject:date:in-reply-to:to :references:message-id:x-mailer; b=DKl3wSIcsg69eWeq74MlXjq3glKF69cTln67o0YCAdGduydXPzH6PxRvChVgUYYbuS PeXIZZYavrbsbGhvjG5dXWucj3RvVk83tfQUYFAyetf6p9jIvx9YaC+xtzhEv1hJtbzy z3yMgX143QNNxygZRWBamu1toy90ZUwDbhwcA=

Assuming the attributes are at the same precedence level I would want/expect appserver role to 'win'.  There is an implied precedence of appserver being higher than base by the containment.   It does put a wrinkle in the attributes precendence table on the wiki  <http://wiki.opscode.com/display/chef/Attributes#Attributes-SettingAttributes>

On Mar 17, 2011, at 6:04 PM, Daniel DeLeo wrote:

Forwarding this to the primary list so everyone can chime in. I don't have a strong opinion either way, but I would like to ensure there is strong support for changing the current behavior before going ahead with this.

To summarize the issue for those unfamiliar:

Given:
* A role "base"
* A role "appserver" that includes role "base"

When both roles set an attribute, which one should "win"? E.g., if both "base" and "appserver" define an attribute "logrotate_days", but you have:
* base: logrotate_days => 5
* appserver: logrotate_days => 7

What should be the value of logrotate days when a node has the "appserver" role? The current behavior is that "base" wins, so logrotate_days would be 5, because it is included last. The bug report asserts that the behavior should be the opposite.


Thanks,
-- 
Dan DeLeo

Forwarded message:

From: Leinartas, Michael < "> >
To: "> < "> >
Date: Thursday, March 17, 2011 10:05:16 AM
Subject: [[chef-dev]] Will attribute merge ordering fix for nested roles be merged in 0.10.0?

Some background:

The last link has a good summary of use case at the top.  Last update was that this was potentially a breaking change and so had to wait until 0.10.0 to be considered.  I'm wondering if there's been any discussion on including it.  I personally feel that the current behavior is very unintuitive and generally undesirable, but perhaps there are use cases I haven't considered. 

FWIW I've been running my chef clients with this patch from 0.9.8 through 0.9.14 without issue. 





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.

§