I see the logic in your explanation, I just don't think it adds up when evaluating when to use a before or notify.
A notify for me says run this resource again, or schedule it to be run again (it may be scheduled by other classes). I don't see why it would also imply a before. If I don't mind if the service starts and then in seconds get's restarted/reloaded then I would happily use a notify, otherwise I would use a before and understand that I need to include a class rather than require it. It's all still going to be within the first catalogue run. Why wouldn't I want a resource to be managed multiple times in one run? 2009/11/2 Peter Meier <peter.me...@immerda.ch>: > >> I'd expect that behaviour if using a before, but really think a notify >> shouldn't cause such a dependency, as i'm only asking for a >> restart/reload. That's just my two pence worth. > > well a notify also implies a before on the notified resource. As you > want to manage a resource only once per run, you also want to trigger > a resource only once. So if you want to notify a resource you want the > resource to be managed after the notifying resource, hence it should > be managed before. In your example this means that if the file likes > to notify the service it have to be managed before. > > Otherwise the service is for example in one run first started and then > later restarted, which isn't something you'd like to have. > > Makes sense, doesn't it? > > cheers pete > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
