[chef] Re: Re: Re: Re: partial search

[Jesse Campbell < >]

should I be able to use partial search to fetch hash values from the node tree, or can i only get individual string values?

i'd like to grab the run list, which is an array of hashes, and i'm getting an array of strings. this is not the same thing.

within cookbooks, should I be able to use partial_search directly, or do I need to include the partial_search cookbook?

On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Adam Jacob < " target="_blank"> > wrote:

It's working in 11.

Adam

From: Jesse Campbell < " target="_blank"> >
Reply-To: " " target="_blank"> " < " target="_blank"> >
Date: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 1:43 PM
To: chef < " target="_blank"> >
Subject: [chef] Re: Re: partial search

Thanks, I found that after posting and since I can't exactly use cookbook code in chef-server-webui, I've been attempting to figure out how to use that code, and i think i might have just gotten it.

Only trouble is that if I ask for "run_list", I get back an array of the names of the run list items, instead of an array of run list items (where each should be a hash containing name, version, and type).

would be nice to see the chef server code...

On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 3:33 PM, AJ Christensen < " target="_blank"> > wrote:

http://community.opscode.com/cookbooks/partial_search

I play to integrate this functionality in to the Heavy Water Discovery cookbook.

Cheers,

AJ

On 14 February 2013 09:12, Jesse Campbell < " target="_blank"> > wrote:
> is partial search implemented yet? I see documentation for it, but i don't
> see any reference to a partial_search method in any of the chef client
> codebase.
>
> the current chef-server-webui has a bug in the status page that it only
> displays 20 results and has no paging... i'd like to get it at least showing
> all results as it did in previous releases, but while i was at it i wanted
> to try to speed up the display a bit... setting it to only return the fields
> necessary seems like a good place to start, but i haven't found it
> implemented anywhere.
>
> thanks!