On Aug 5, 8:33 am, Nigel Kersten <ni...@puppetlabs.com> wrote: > We have a bunch of problems people regularly run into with node inheritance, > and it's something we'd like to find a better solution for. > > Is anyone using node inheritance and happy with how it works? If so, can you > describe your setup briefly?
I am using node inheritance and I am happy with how it works, within the limited scope of the things I do with it. My setup is fairly simple: - I use a nodes.pp manifest and no ENC. - I have only two levels in my inheritance hierarchy, which correspond approximately to machine type defaults (workstation vs. server) on one level and individual machines on the other level. All per-machine node definitions inherit from one of the machine type definitions. - My node definitions do nothing but include classes. There are no variable definitions or resource declarations. As I tell people here from time to time, node (single-) inheritance doesn't fit the problem space very well because few sites admit a satisfactory node taxonomy of any complexity. Moreover, a lot of the things one might conceive of doing via node inheritance can be done as well or better with classes (classes in general, not necessarily class inheritance). If I were using an ENC then I would have no use for node inheritance: I would achieve everything I currently get from node inheritance through my ENC implementation instead. 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-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.
