[chef] Re: Re: Using data generated in a LWRP

[AJ Christensen < >]

I'd suggest storing the data you are receiving from AWS in the node.
You could (with a bit of fiddling) probably store it in a data-bag
too, although it would have to be pre-created so machines can update
it.

The elastic block device LWRP has an example of the former.

Cheers,

--AJ

On 3 April 2012 18:53, Andrea Campi 
<
 >
 wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 7:21 PM, Nick Peirson 
> <
 >
>  wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've only been using chef for a couple of months, so bear with me if I
>> mangle the terminology :)
>>
>> I've got a LWRP that's creating an AWS RDS instance. Within the LWRP I wait
>> till the RDS instance becomes available (while loop + sleep) and get it's
>> details, of which I'm particularly interested in the endpoint address. I 
>> can
>> log this by doing something along the lines of:
>>
>> Chef::Log.info("RDS endpoint address is 
>> #{rds_instance[:endpoint_address]}")
>>
>> What I now want to do is subscribe to the resource that's using this
>> provider to create the rds_instance and for the subscribing resource to 
>> have
>> the rds_instance object available, particularly the endpoint address. The
>> subscribing resource is then going to connect to the RDS instance create a
>> database, set up some permissions, etc.
>>
>> Is there a way to pass this information, e.g. something along the lines of
>> making the rds_instance object available? If not, my other thought is to
>> store it on the node or in a data bag, but this seems like a hack to get
>> round a limitation that's only there due to my lack of knowledge.
>
> The interesting thing is that the Notification object (which is used
> to keep track of queued notifications) holds a reference to resource
> that triggered the notification.
> You can see that in the logs:
>
>        Chef::Log.info( "#{notification.notifying_resource} sending
> #{notification.action}"\
>                        " action to #{notification.resource} (delayed)")
>
> However when it's time to call run_action, that reference is dropped.
>
> We could store a reference to either the Notification or
> notification.notifying_resource in the run_context, so that the
> notified resource could access it.
> I don't see a real downside here, and it.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> Andrea