On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 10:50 PM, John Warburton <jwarbur...@gmail.com> wrote: > The issue isn't organising puppet, but dealing with a global team of 50 > people who may or may not really understand what they are dealing with > > I was thinking that rather than find out too late that someone has tried to > manage the same file in muliple modules, I was wondering if putting all file > sunder the same tree might make it a little easier for less adept puppet > users?
You shouldn't find out until too late though? If you have duplicate resources in your manifests, they should fail to compile. Do you use VCS $Id$ tags? I find those make it reasonably clear when a file has been pushed centrally. > > John > > On 23 March 2010 13:17, Ohad Levy <ohadl...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Why not simply using inheritance? or alternativly, have a source search >> order? >> e.g. find the first files it find. >> in moduleA, modubleB, common >> >> if you really need to manage different parts of the file in different >> modules, you might want to look for volcane concat module. >> >> cheers, >> Ohad >> >> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 8:23 AM, John Warburton <jwarbur...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi All >>> >>> I've done a small scale puppet (130 servers) implementation per the book >>> and had my files hierarchy under each module: >>> modules/module1/files >>> modules/module2/files >>> modules/module3/files >>> etc >>> >>> This worked fine because we only had a small number of people working on >>> the project and a small number of files to manage. >>> >>> I am now looking at massively upscaling to have puppet run on thousands >>> of servers, with a global admin staff of about 50, and manage more than 6000 >>> files (variants and unique instances). >>> >>> In a previous life, I've used cfengine with a large file hierarchy spread >>> over multiple modules and had to manage issues where differing modules >>> wanted to manage the same file. Identifying the issue, and refactoring >>> modules took a lot of time and effort - and that was with an admin team of 5 >>> all in the same office. >>> >>> I am thinking that a monolithic module (call it ALL_FILES) that managed >>> all files and templates will be the way to go, so that it is more visible if >>> a file is already being managed, given the size and spread of admins: >>> modules/ALL_FILES/files >>> >>> Does anyone have any opinion or experiences they wish to share? >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> John >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "Puppet Users" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Puppet Users" group. >> To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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. > > > > -- > John Warburton > Ph: 0417 299 600 > Email: jwarbur...@gmail.com > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Puppet Users" group. > To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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. > -- nigel -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
