[chef] Re: chef-client (solo) run lock

[Jesse Nelson < >]

Useful to us we run client on an interval and I have seen the stacking 
clients.  




> On Oct 9, 2013, at 11:26 AM, "Moser, Kevin" 
> <
 >
>  wrote:
> 
> For those that are scheduling the chef-client to run on an interval and 
> take advantage of the client locking so only one will run at a time, is the 
> behavior where the client sits and waits to acquire a lock what folks 
> depend on?
> 
> At first we had the assumption that the client would just shut back down if 
> it can't acquire the lock.  However we now recognize this is not the case 
> and there are instances where we have client runs stacking up on top of 
> each other to the point where basically chef is running the whole time.
> 
> It's a problem that is manageable but got me thinking, is there 
> need/interest in having the behavior configurable.  Maybe a command line or 
> Chef::Config parameter that is like:
> 
> --run-lock wait or --run-lock terminate
> 
> Or in the config
> 
> run_lock "wait" or run_lock "terminate"
> 
> Default behavior being wait as it is today but if it is terminate then if 
> the client can't acquire the lock it just logs a message and shuts down?
> 
> Is this useful to people, am I missing a reason why we wouldn't want this 
> behavior?
> 
> Was hoping to generate some conversation and see what people think…
> 
> Kevin