[chef] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: notifies on resource not notifying

[Sean OMeara < >]

Okay so If I'm reading this right -

'teamcity_build[download-artefact]' notifies ->
'windows_zipfile[unzip_artefacts]'  notifies ->
'template[CHEF.js]' notifies ->
'windows_batch[run_dropkick]'

... everything is being notified correctly except the windows_batch 
resource...

Quickly experimenting with chained notifications...

https://gist.github.com/4400651

I can get the chaining to execute when modifying content in
template[file1], but not on perms.
So... there's a bug. (I'll file it later).

Is your template resource actually fixing itself?
It has a default action of :nothing, which you are notifying to
:create... but the :create action is still convergent (idempotent),
and the windows_batch resource will only get notified if it has to
repair a file on disk.

You may look at notifying windows_batch from either windows_zipfile or
teamcity_build directly instead of trying to chain them like that. You
can put multiple notifies and subscribe statements on a resource, in
case you didn't know =)

-s


On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Seif Attar 
<
 >
 wrote:
> Sure.
>
> https://gist.github.com/4400257
>
> Thanks Sean. I managed to find the code that calls updated_by_last_action
> and I don't see any code around win32 in there, my theory failed, I think.
>
>
> On 28 December 2012 17:49, Sean OMeara 
> <
 >
>  wrote:
>>
>> Can you gist a code snippet?
>> -s
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 12:47 PM, Seif Attar 
>> <
 >
>>  wrote:
>> > I seem to be getting the same problem with the template resource, the
>> > resource runs, I can see in the log output that the content has been
>> > updated, but the notifies don't trigger.
>> >
>> > Is it possible that I am suffering from the same bug? I can't imagine
>> > that a
>> > basic resource like template would have a problem with notifications,
>> > there
>> > must be something with my setup.
>> >
>> > I had a look at the source code of the template and file providers, but
>> > couldn't see anywhere that it calls updated_by_last_action(true) :S
>> >
>> > My gut feeling is that it is something that has to do with the windows
>> > file
>> > provider.
>> >
>> >
>> > On 27 December 2012 18:46, Seif Attar 
>> > <
 >
>> >  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Thank you both for taking the time to explain this, I get it now.
>> >>
>> >> To get the teamcity_build resource to notify, all I need to do is call
>> >> @new_resource.updated_by_last_action(true)
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for the advice on the idempotency, I think I will need to take
>> >> it
>> >> with the original cookbook author as he had provided a parameter
>> >> 'overwrite'
>> >> on the resource, which currently throws an exception if overwrite is
>> >> false
>> >> and the file already existed. I guess to keep with current behaviour:
>> >>
>> >> If the files doesn't exist -> download and set updated
>> >> files exists and override is false -> throw
>> >> file exists, override is true and checksums differ -> download and set
>> >> updated
>> >> file exists, override is true and checksums differ -> do nothing and
>> >> don't
>> >> set updated.
>> >>
>> >> Had a quick look at adding basic auth to remote_file and it seems it
>> >> would
>> >> require changes to Chef::Rest as well, too risky for my basic ruby
>> >> skills :)
>> >> copying the checksum code into those recipes would be easier.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks again,
>> >> Seif
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 27 December 2012 18:12, Sean OMeara 
>> >> <
 >
>> >>  wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Hi Seif.
>> >>>
>> >>> It turns out that I gave you the wrong advice, since I didn't actually
>> >>> dig into the teamcity cookbook code (like I am now.)
>> >>>
>> >>> The gist I sent you was a workaround for when you're using nested Chef
>> >>> resources in LWRP code. It would help in a situation like this:
>> >>>
>> >>> # cookbooks/custom/providers/foo.rb
>> >>>
>> >>> action :download do
>> >>>
>> >>>   directory "/some/dir" do
>> >>>      action :create
>> >>>    owner "fonzi"
>> >>>
>> >>>    remote_file "somefile" do
>> >>>        source "http://www.example.com/somefile.tgz";
>> >>>        checksum "123456"
>> >>>    end
>> >>>
>> >>> end
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> ^ In that example, "directory" and "remote_file" are Chef resources.
>> >>> One of the contracts that a Chef provider has to fulfill is that it
>> >>> will set the new_resource.updated_by_last_action(true) it they make a
>> >>> change to the system.
>> >>>
>> >>> If  'directory[/some/dir]' had to be repaired in any way, the
>> >>> directory provider setting that flag is what allows notifications to
>> >>> happen.
>> >>>
>> >>> if 'remote_file[somefile]' had to be repaired, the same idea applies.
>> >>>
>> >>> The bug the gist worked around was that the custom_foo resource
>> >>> defined in the LWRP code could not inherit the updated status of the
>> >>> nested 'directory' or 'remote_file' resources.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> While good to know, this is now the problem you have.
>> >>>
>> >>> The work you're doing is implemented in two pure-ruby library
>> >>> functions that ship with the cookbook.
>> >>>
>> >>> initialize_connection
>> >>> download_all
>> >>>
>> >>> Since these are not idempotent Chef resources, the work-around does
>> >>> not
>> >>> apply.
>> >>> Please feel free to un-cargo-cult your code. My bad.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> What you really need to do is setup tests to determine if you need to
>> >>> "fix" a teamcity_build resource on disk.
>> >>>
>> >>> If the resource needs to be repaired, THEN do the work:
>> >>>   initialize_connection
>> >>>   download_all
>> >>> new_resource.updated_by_last_action(true)
>> >>>
>> >>> That will allow notifications to work in the default run_context
>> >>>
>> >>> This deck does a really good job at explaining how it all works.
>> >>> http://www.slideshare.net/geekbri/lwrp-presentation#btnNext
>> >>>
>> >>> -s
>> >>>
>> >>> On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 12:32 PM, Seif Attar 
>> >>> <
 >
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> > Thanks Sean,
>> >>> >
>> >>> > My ruby skills are limited, and I didn't quite get that gist or what
>> >>> > it
>> >>> > was
>> >>> > doing, but I did manage to get something working:
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > https://github.com/seif/teamcity/commit/125633db4ccd62a43f3946feae00ba358b5d75b1
>> >>> >
>> >>> > I am not sure what
>> >>> >
>> >>> > if sub_run_context.resource_collection.any?(&:updated?)
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Is supposed to do, as it was always returning false for me. What
>> >>> > effects
>> >>> > will removing it do? does the provider look sane to you now?
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Much appreciated,
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Seif
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > On 27 December 2012 15:52, Sean OMeara 
>> >>> > <
 >
>> >>> >  wrote:
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Hi Seif!
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> This is a bug in the LWRP DSL.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> You can read about it here:
>> >>> >> http://tickets.opscode.com/browse/CHEF-3681
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> There is a fix coming in Chef 11 which will require a small changes
>> >>> >> to
>> >>> >> the all LWRP code including teamcity and windows cookbooks to make
>> >>> >> notifications work.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> In the meantime, you modify the teamcity_build LWRP and cargo-cult
>> >>> >> the
>> >>> >> pattern referenced in the above ticket.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> https://gist.github.com/d85be145f3ff824ccc07/0e97d44f20ec65411b141cb46cbeb19bb34b44ad
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Good luck and let me know if you have any questions!
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> -s
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 10:43 AM, Seif Attar 
>> >>> >> <
 >
>> >>> >> wrote:
>> >>> >> > Hello,
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> > I am writing a recipe that calls 3 resources, the first resource
>> >>> >> > has
>> >>> >> > conditional execution and a notifies, goal being that the other 2
>> >>> >> > dont
>> >>> >> > run
>> >>> >> > unless this one passed the condition.
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> > I can see the first resource being run, but it doesn't seem to be
>> >>> >> > notifying,
>> >>> >> > can someone help figure out what I am messing up? is there a
>> >>> >> > better
>> >>> >> > way
>> >>> >> > to
>> >>> >> > go about this?
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> > Here is a gist of the recipe, and the debug output from Chef
>> >>> >> > 10.16.4:
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> > https://gist.github.com/4389024
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> > Any help appreciated.
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> > Thanks
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>
>