Re: [Puppet Users] Re: Strange messages on 0.25.4.

[Patrick]

On Feb 22, 2010, at 9:34 PM, Nobuchika Tanaka wrote:
> 
> err: Could not resolve 10.72.150.56: undefined method `include?' for
> nil:NilClass
> err: Could not resolve 10.72.150.56: undefined method `include?' for
> nil:NilClass
> info: Could not find certificate for 'sol10tst1'
> err: Could not resolve 10.72.150.56: undefined method `include?' for
> nil:NilClass
> info: Could not find certificate_request for 'sol10tst1'
> err: Could not resolve 10.72.150.56: undefined method `include?' for
> nil:NilClass
> notice: sol10tst1 has a waiting certificate request
> notice: Signed certificate request for sol10tst1
> notice: Removing file Puppet::SSL::CertificateRequest sol10tst1 at '/
> etc/puppet/ssl/ca/requests/sol10tst1.pem'
> err: Could not resolve 10.72.150.56: undefined method `include?' for
> nil:NilClass
> #

This might be a failed reverse lookup to me.  I don't know enough to help you, 
but giving this information might help the devs.

Is 10.72.150.56 the client or the server?
Also, what happens on each of them if you do an nslookup for 10.72.150.56?  

-- 
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.

[Puppet Users] Re: Magazine article comparing CPU usage of Puppet vs. Cfengine

[tobyriddell]

> Comparing CPU utilisation is like benchmarking cars by seeing how well
> they float.

Without wanting to appear flippant, perhaps I want a floating car :)

In my case I need a tool that *if* run during production hours will
consume very little CPU - we've got very stringent requirements for
application jitter. It's likely we'll end up running Puppet (or
whatever) only outside production hours.

 (We may end up setting up dedicated processor sets for the
applications, leaving a pool for other processes, including Puppet -
clearly configuring processor sets is something that Puppet can help
with!)

Toby

-- 
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.

[Puppet Users] Re: Magazine article comparing CPU usage of Puppet vs. Cfengine

[tobyriddell]

> I'd have to see the article to know for sure if the CPU utilization
> difference is negligible, but having run puppet for several months now I
> have not seen any performance impact myself.  Most systems have so may
> extra cores nowadays that aren't doing anything (especially in our case,
> running puppet during off-hours) it would have to peg multiple CPUs for an
> extended period of time to make a noticeable impact.

>From the results in the article, Puppet required between 10x and 56x
more CPU seconds.

-- 
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.

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: Magazine article comparing CPU usage of Puppet vs. Cfengine

[Oliver Schad]

Am Tuesday 23 February 2010 schrieb mir tobyriddell:
> > Comparing CPU utilisation is like benchmarking cars by seeing how
> > well they float.
> 
> Without wanting to appear flippant, perhaps I want a floating car :)
> 
> In my case I need a tool that *if* run during production hours will
> consume very little CPU - we've got very stringent requirements for
> application jitter. It's likely we'll end up running Puppet (or
> whatever) only outside production hours.

Do you know process priorities? It's very easy to run puppet with this. 
Most CPUs has so much idle times that puppet is not a problem. The RAM 
usage could be a more significant problem in smaller systems.

Regards
Oli


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

[Puppet Users] Re: Strange messages on 0.25.4.

[Nobuchika Tanaka]

> Is 10.72.150.56 the client or the server?
10.72.150.56 is client and hostname is sol10tst1.
mise is server.

> Also, what happ on each of them if you do an nslookup for 10.72.150.56?  

Both of them can't connet server, because we are't using DNS.

mise# nslookup 10.72.150.56
;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached.

sol10tst1# nslookup 10.72.150.56
;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached.

Does Puppet need DNS internally?

Nobuchika Tanaka.

-- 
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.

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: Magazine article comparing CPU usage of Puppet vs. Cfengine

[Ohad Levy]

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 11:11 AM, Oliver Schad  wrote:
>
>
> Do you know process priorities? It's very easy to run puppet with this.
> Most CPUs has so much idle times that puppet is not a problem. The RAM
> usage could be a more significant problem in smaller systems.
>
Using nice is not an option with puppet, as all services/daemons that puppet
will start would be in the same nice level as puppet.

Ohad

-- 
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.

Re: [Puppet Users] Foreman isn't seeing my classes

[Ohad Levy]

Hi,

Currently Foreman does not auto assign  classes to your nodes (Except if you
are already using an external nodes and then you can import them via a rake
task).

the main issue here is that I didnt think its a good idea to import all of
the hosts classes (e.g. from storeconfig db) as a lot of the classes are
imported via other classes.

while if its important to you, we can probably come up with a simple task
which will import all of the hosts classes from storeconfigs, I'm not sure
if you are using Foreman with external nodes (e.g. remove all of your nodes
statements), it would make a lot of sense.

if someone have the time to find a way to convert from a nodes statement
into external nodes kind of structure that would be great :)

cheers,
Ohad

On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 11:11 PM, Andrew Dickson  wrote:

> I've recently set up foreman with my existing puppet server, and I was
> able to get all the host reporting working (I'm using storeconfigs),
> and once I ran:
>
> RAILS_ENV=production rake puppet:import:puppet_classes
>
> My puppet classes showed up on the settings page, however, it doesn't
> seem to be associating any hosts with the classes they have applied to
> them.  when I click "hosts" under a puppetclass on the settings page,
> it always returns nothing, and I get the same result when I try to use
> the query interface.  The query interface seems to work fine for
> querying by fact though  Have I missed a step somewhere to get
> foreman to keep track of the classes that each host has?
>
> thanks,
> -drew
>
> --
> 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.

Re: [Puppet Users] Magazine article comparing CPU usage of Puppet vs. Cfengine

[Aurelien Degremont]

Hello

When testing puppet scalability, we noticed that one bottleneck is CPU usage on 
puppetmaster node.
To scale up the number of concurrent puppet clients running in the same time, we tweaked our puppet configuration in 
order to reduce puppetmaster work, mainly reducing its CPU work, and so scale up. (One major point was: do not overload 
your fileserver).



Aurélien

Toby Riddell a écrit :

I received my copy of ;login (the Usenix magazine) today. There's an
article* comparing CPU utilisation of Puppet and Cfengine. To
abbreviate massively: Puppet requires much more CPU than Cfengine when
both verifying and fixing configuration.

I'm in the early days of implementing Puppet and this has given me
something to think about. Whilst I won't be verifying/fixing
configuration on our servers on a continual basis, it would be nice if
it could be done with low CPU overhead. I am not familiar with
Cfengine beyond the reading I did while choosing which configuration
management tool to use; I chose Puppet because it seemed more flexible
and I figured me and my team would be able to get more done in less
time once we'd learned how to use it.

Can CPU overhead be reduced to something closer to Cfengine, or is it
inherent in the design/implementation of Puppet? Is there an upside in
terms of greater flexibility of Puppet?

I'd welcome comments from those familiar with both Puppet and Cfengine.

*Article is here:
http://www.usenix.org/publications/login/2010-02/pdfs/bjorgeengen.pdf.
Note that reading the magazine article requires a subscription, at
least until Feb 2011 (articles published more than 12 months ago are
openly available).




--
Aurelien Degremont
CEA

--
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.

Re: [Puppet Users] Augeas type: Removing an entry from /etc/hosts

[Paul Elliott]

Hi David,

On 22/02/10 19:25, David Lutterkort wrote:
> You can do this by looking for the entries with a single path
> expression:
> augtool> match /files/etc/hosts/*[ipaddr = '127.0.1.1']
> gives you all entries in /etc/hosts with that IP. To remove them, just
> do 'rm' instead of 'match'. From your post, I wasn't sure if you had

> [1] http://augeas.net/page/Path_expressions

Perfect, that's just what I was looking for and it works like a charm.

Thanks, Paul.

--
Paul Elliott, UNIX Systems Administrator
Computing Service, University of York

-- 
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.

[Puppet Users] Re: Proper Augeas usage

[Tim Stoop]

Hi David,

Thanks for your reply, it cleared up some things!

On 22 feb, 20:35, David Lutterkort  wrote:
> You want to restrict when to make those changes with the onlyif
> paramater, something like
>
>         augeas { "...":
>           context => ...
>           changes => ...
>           onlyif => "match *[ Pin = 'release' and Package = 'augeas-lenses'] 
> size == 0"
>         }

Ah, so I was wrong in thinking that augeas would treat these kind of
config blocks as one entity with different variables. That makes the
augeas type a little less useful than I thought, but I probably
should've figured that out when I was building the lenses I needed.
There's simply no $name equivalent in augeas. Thanks for making that
clear.

> You'd need to add another augeas resource to cover that case, something
> like
>
>         augeas { "...":
>           context => "/files/etc/apt/preferences[Pin = 'release' and Package 
> = 'augeas-lenses']",
>           changes => "set Pin-Priority 900",
>           onlyif => "match * size == 0"
>         }

Ok, so I'd be better off creating a type that adds these different
kinds of augeas resources with different checks for each variable part
of the resource.

> >  If there's no augeas-
> > lenses definition available, it *segfaults*:
>
> > /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/augeas.rb:48: [BUG] Segmentation fault
> > ruby 1.8.7 (2008-08-11 patchlevel 72) [x86_64-linux]
>
> > Aborted
>
> When that happens, is libaugeas0 installed ?

Yes, very sure it is, because my augeas resource depends on
Package["libaugeas-ruby1.8"], which depends on libaugeas0.

Thanks for the tips! I'll see what I can make of it. Even though it
requires more code, I still think augeas is a cleaner solution than
concatenated files (although I love your concatenated_file module,
DavidS!).

--
Kind regards,
Tim

-- 
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.

[Puppet Users] Re: Magazine article comparing CPU usage of Puppet vs. Cfengine

[Tim Stoop]

On 23 feb, 10:02, tobyriddell  wrote:
> From the results in the article, Puppet required between 10x and 56x
> more CPU seconds.

Out of curiosity, which part of puppet is causing this load? If it's
the puppetmaster, well then, that shouldn't be a big problem. I'd
recommend a dedicated puppetmaster in most setups anyway. Or when
puppet is actually applying a whole manifest instead of just checking
if things are set correctly? I've looked at our trending and I don't
see any noticeable additional load on the machines, at least. Unless
of course I'm rebuilding the entire server. But I don't care about
puppet load at such times. A little nuance for us non-subscribers to
Usenix would be welcome :)

--
Kind regards,
Tim

-- 
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.

[Puppet Users] Re: using (possibly) undefined out of scope variables in an erb template

[Oded]

Got it !

<% classes.each do |current_class| -%>
<% if has_variable?(current_class + "::iptable_rule_chain") then -%>
<%= scope.lookupvar(current_class + "::iptable_rule_chain") %>
<% end -%>
<% end -%>

So easy ,all that time I was trying to use Bash style string
concatenation , which for some strange reason didn't work :)

Now each class that has a variable named "iptable_rule_chain" adds a
line to my template, yey !

Theres a new  issue with scoping now :  if i use this variable in a
class that calls other classes I get duplicate lines as the same
variable is "in the scope"  of several classes ,currently I write the
manifests around this issue (by using "subclasses"),but it would be
nice if I could control the scoping of each variable.
I prefer this solution to using Augeas as it is more
"deterministic" ,  I know exactly how my file will look like without
considering its current  state.


On Feb 13, 8:35 pm, Oded  wrote:
> Actually I am trying to go around it :)
> I choose to use the classes array because of the an ordering issue I
> encountered while trying to build an array of iptables rules  : the
> template would get  evaluated before some  the classes would get the
> chance to add lines to the array.
> I'm hoping that by using the classes array  (which is in its finale
> state before the classes start to run) I can avoid the ordering issue.
> my question was about the ruby syntax  of checking for undefined out
> of scope variables (or are you trying to tell me that theres no way
> around it ?).
>
> Oded
>
> On Feb 11, 10:33 pm, Ohad Levy  wrote:
>
>
>
> > you might be hitting -http://projects.reductivelabs.com/issues/2309
>
> > OhadOn Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 1:09 AM, Oded  wrote:
> > > I'm trying to use  (possibly) undefined variables that are not in the
> > > scope of my class in an erb template.
> > > How do I combine this :
>
> > > <% if has_variable?("myvar") then %>
> > > myvar has <%= myvar %> value
> > > <% end %>
>
> > > with this :
> > > <%= scope.lookupvar(myclass::myvar) %>
>
> > > The idea is to get the iptables template to go through all the classes
> > > assigned to a machine and add lines on relevant classes only(by
> > > searching for a specific variable in that class),this way I will not
> > > be forced to edit the iptables template/class every time another
> > > module needs to change its iptable settings.
>
> > > Without checking for undefined variables my code looks like this :
>
> > > <% classes.each do |current_class| -%>
> > > <% scope.lookupvar(current_class::iptables_input_tags) %>
> > > <% end -%>
>
> > > Oded
>
> > > --
> > > 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 > >  groups.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.

[Puppet Users] How to conditionally include classes based on environment?

[ascodemus]

Hi,
I'm new to puppet (doing an assesment of the puppet features
currently) and I believe many of you can tell me how to resolve these
questions I'm unable to find answers for. I have the "Pulling Strings
with Puppet"-book and have been crawling through the reductivelabs
puppet wiki-pages without answers.

Q1) How can I include a class for a node depending on the status of
the managed node? Example is it possible to do include a class based
on existence of a file e.g. “/root/puppet/dl580” on the managed puppet-
client node like:

node webserv2 inherits basenode {
  {
  include dl580
}
  {
  include dl380
}
   ...etc...
}

Q2) Is it possible to pass information (e.g. string) i.e. an output of
an “exec” execution on a puppet-client and store this information into
a puppet variable?

Fiddling around with facts set as environment variables
“FACTER_name=value” would somehow do this, but this is a bit of a
hack?

A good use for this would be to do an exec execution on a managed
puppet node (puppet client) and based on the information passed,
different paths could be taken. e.g.

$return_string = exec { ... }
case $return_string {
  was_blue: {

  }
  was_red: {

  }
  was_yellow: {

  }
  default: {

  }
}

Q3) Well when I’m hacking with the FACTER-variables, I notice that if
I’ve included new FACTER-variables within the /etc/init.d/puppet (or
sourced from there from another file) this obviously requires puppet
restart to make my own FACTERs available – is there any other method
to make my own FACTERs available once set without need to restart the
puppet client?

Below is an example that could be useful:

case $virt_or_physical {
   physical: {
   
}
   virtual: {
   
}
   default: {
   
}
}

Thanks in advance!
B.R. Asko

-- 
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.

[Puppet Users] Feature Request: Settable 'nice' value.

[Trevor Vaughan]

So, some of us would like to be able to set the nice value on puppetd.
However, we don't want all of our services (and some of our execs)
re-niced.

Would it be feasible/practical to have the ability to set the nice
value explicitly on Service and Exec calls?

Thanks,

Trevor

-- 
Trevor Vaughan
Vice President, Onyx Point, Inc
(410) 541-6699
tvaug...@onyxpoint.com

-- This account not approved for unencrypted proprietary information --

-- 
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.

Re: [Puppet Users] Augeas type: Removing an entry from /etc/hosts

[Jesús Couto]

On a tangent, anybody using augeas under puppet to manage /etc/sudoers? ...
and how?

I was thinking about doing so to add/delete several commands to an
administrator group as part of setting up an apache/tomcat/whatever
instance, but cant figure out how to do it, for reasons similar to this
example. And rm doesnt work for adding :-P



Jesús Couto F.

-- 
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.

[Puppet Users] Re: Magazine article comparing CPU usage of Puppet vs. Cfengine

[tobyriddell]

> Out of curiosity, which part of puppet is causing this load? If it's
> the puppetmaster, well then, that shouldn't be a big problem. I'd
> recommend a dedicated puppetmaster in most setups anyway. Or when
> puppet is actually applying a whole manifest instead of just checking
> if things are set correctly? I've looked at our trending and I don't
> see any noticeable additional load on the machines, at least. Unless
> of course I'm rebuilding the entire server. But I don't care about
> puppet load at such times.

> A little nuance for us non-subscribers to Usenix would be welcome :)

Apologies - should have given some more details (I'll respect Usenix's
copyright so won't cut/paste wholesale)

The measured CPU was puppetd on the client, the command run was: /usr/
sbin/puppetd --no-daemonize --onetime

The result was either to add entries to /etc/hosts or to confirm the
contents of /etc/hosts.

Toby

-- 
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.

[Puppet Users] Re: Magazine article comparing CPU usage of Puppet vs. Cfengine

[tobyriddell]

> Also, this doesn't seem to be CPU load, just time.  It took puppet longer
> to apply a manifest than CFengine, I'm assuming they made the same changes
> on both systems and had both CFengine and puppet correct the same
> differences.  Wall clocks != higher load.

The difference was found to be in CPU seconds, 'force cswitch' (i.e.
CPU time quantum used up) was also measured and the ratios found were
similar.

-- 
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.

Re: [Puppet Users] Augeas type: Removing an entry from /etc/hosts

[Rob McBroom]

On Feb 23, 2010, at 7:37 AM, Jesús Couto wrote:

> On a tangent, anybody using augeas under puppet to manage /etc/sudoers? ... 
> and how?

I tried, but all I could get it to do was add the entries to the end of 
`/etc/sudoers` over and over every 30 minutes. I gave up and made a define that 
calls some hacky execs.

I’d love to hear there’s a way (in 0.24.8).

-- 
Rob McBroom


-- 
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.

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: Magazine article comparing CPU usage of Puppet vs. Cfengine

[James Cammarata]

On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 08:57:37 -0800 (PST), Tim Stoop 
wrote:
> On 23 feb, 10:02, tobyriddell  wrote:
>> From the results in the article, Puppet required between 10x and 56x
>> more CPU seconds.
> 
> Out of curiosity, which part of puppet is causing this load? If it's
> the puppetmaster, well then, that shouldn't be a big problem. I'd
> recommend a dedicated puppetmaster in most setups anyway. Or when
> puppet is actually applying a whole manifest instead of just checking
> if things are set correctly? I've looked at our trending and I don't
> see any noticeable additional load on the machines, at least. Unless
> of course I'm rebuilding the entire server. But I don't care about
> puppet load at such times. A little nuance for us non-subscribers to
> Usenix would be welcome :)

Also, this doesn't seem to be CPU load, just time.  It took puppet longer
to apply a manifest than CFengine, I'm assuming they made the same changes
on both systems and had both CFengine and puppet correct the same
differences.  Wall clocks != higher load.

In my opinion, this is a non-issue, since normally if you've got any major
number of systems you'll either be triggering runs in parallel, or they'll
be updating automatically on their own environment wide.

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-- 
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.

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: Strange messages on 0.25.4.

[Patrick]

The only explanation that I can find that explains the problems that I and a 
few other user have been having is that 0.25.x adds a security feature that 
makes it needed during the creation of client certificates.  (Either that or 
during the signing or retrieval of the certificates.)  It could be a bug, but I 
think it's more likely a feature. 

As a workaround you could try adding the client to the server's /etc/hosts file.

On Feb 23, 2010, at 1:22 AM, Nobuchika Tanaka wrote:
> 
> Does Puppet need DNS internally?
> 
> Nobuchika Tanaka.

-- 
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.

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: Magazine article comparing CPU usage of Puppet vs. Cfengine

[Lindsay Holmwood]

On 23 February 2010 03:49, tobyriddell  wrote:
>> Comparing CPU utilisation is like benchmarking cars by seeing how well
>> they float.
>
> Without wanting to appear flippant, perhaps I want a floating car :)

Then perhaps you should be looking for a boat?

Puppet's performance and scaling problems aren't that unique. It's
pretty much the same thing that happened with Rails - people started
using and deploying it without considering the performance
implications, and were surprised when it didn't scale. Rails *does*
scale, just not out of the box. I'd wager that, to a certain extent,
Puppet is in the same boat.

Performance, expressiveness, stability. Pick two.

>
> In my case I need a tool that *if* run during production hours will
> consume very little CPU - we've got very stringent requirements for
> application jitter. It's likely we'll end up running Puppet (or
> whatever) only outside production hours.
>
>  (We may end up setting up dedicated processor sets for the
> applications, leaving a pool for other processes, including Puppet -
> clearly configuring processor sets is something that Puppet can help
> with!)
>
> Toby
>
> --
> 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.
>
>



-- 
w: http://holmwood.id.au/~lindsay/
t: @auxesis

-- 
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.

Re: [Puppet Users] Foreman isn't seeing my classes

[Andrew Dickson]

I'm not currently using external nodes, but I could switch over if the
functionality I'm looking for will work in that scenario...  Either
way, I would love a way to query for hosts that have a particular
class, even if it's just an inherited class of some other class.  That
would be a great way to get a definitive list of all the hosts
affected by changing something in a class where you're not sure what
other classes include/require it.  The query interface works great for
selecting hosts based on facts, I'd love to use it to select hosts
based on puppetclasses too.   Other than that, Foreman looks pretty
cool so far, thanks!

-drew

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 1:46 AM, Ohad Levy  wrote:
> Hi,
> Currently Foreman does not auto assign  classes to your nodes (Except if you
> are already using an external nodes and then you can import them via a rake
> task).
> the main issue here is that I didnt think its a good idea to import all of
> the hosts classes (e.g. from storeconfig db) as a lot of the classes are
> imported via other classes.
> while if its important to you, we can probably come up with a simple task
> which will import all of the hosts classes from storeconfigs, I'm not sure
> if you are using Foreman with external nodes (e.g. remove all of your nodes
> statements), it would make a lot of sense.
> if someone have the time to find a way to convert from a nodes statement
> into external nodes kind of structure that would be great :)
> cheers,
> Ohad
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 11:11 PM, Andrew Dickson  wrote:
>>
>> I've recently set up foreman with my existing puppet server, and I was
>> able to get all the host reporting working (I'm using storeconfigs),
>> and once I ran:
>>
>> RAILS_ENV=production rake puppet:import:puppet_classes
>>
>> My puppet classes showed up on the settings page, however, it doesn't
>> seem to be associating any hosts with the classes they have applied to
>> them.  when I click "hosts" under a puppetclass on the settings page,
>> it always returns nothing, and I get the same result when I try to use
>> the query interface.  The query interface seems to work fine for
>> querying by fact though  Have I missed a step somewhere to get
>> foreman to keep track of the classes that each host has?
>>
>> thanks,
>> -drew
>>
>> --
>> 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.
>

-- 
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.

[Puppet Users] Announcing Puppetcamp Europe 2010 – May 27-28 in Ghent, Belgium - Open for registration

[Scott Olson]

Details on the event and registration can be found here:

http://reductivelabs.com/2010/02/23/announcing-puppetcamp-europe-2010-may-27-28-in-ghent-belgium/

Hope to see you there.

-- 
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.

Re: [Puppet Users] parsedfile provider documentation?

[Frederik Wagner]

Hi David,

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 1:09 AM, David Lutterkort  wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-02-22 at 10:45 +0100, Frederik Wagner wrote:
>> MODULES_LOADED_ON_BOOT="module1 module2"
>>
>> My goal ist to have a type, which can append a "module3" to this
>> entry, or replace the whole list, etc. (to stay generic for different
>> files in /etc/sysconfig).
>
> If you can live with replacing the entire list, you can just use augeas:
>
>augeas { "my_boot_modules":
>changes => "set 
> /files/etc/sysconfig/kernel/MODULES_LOADED_ON_BOOT '$mymodules'"
>}
>
> If you need to build the list up from something else, you might want to
> wrap the above into a define that computes $mymodules from that
> something.

I would need to append single modules to the list, therefore I was
thinking to write the provider.

>
> There's also ways to make this just append a specific module, but that
> would require some work on the Augeas side.

does this need new features on the augeas side? Or is it already
doable with the current augeas?

Anyway a bit more documentation on the ParseFile provider would be nice.

Thanks a lot,
Fredeirk

> David
>
>
> --
> 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.

[Puppet Users] Puppetcamp Europe 2010 - Call for submissions

[Scott Olson]

We are looking for great speakers for our Puppetcamp Europe event in
Ghent, Belgium. Get details on submitting your proposal here:

http://reductivelabs.com/2010/02/23/puppetcamp-europe-2010-call-for-submissions/

-- 
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.

[Puppet Users] Re: Magazine article comparing CPU usage of Puppet vs. Cfengine

[Thomas Bellman]

James Cammarata wrote:


Also, this doesn't seem to be CPU load, just time.  It took puppet longer
to apply a manifest than CFengine, I'm assuming they made the same changes
on both systems and had both CFengine and puppet correct the same
differences.  Wall clocks != higher load.

In my opinion, this is a non-issue, since normally if you've got any major
number of systems you'll either be triggering runs in parallel, or they'll
be updating automatically on their own environment wide.


The time it takes to run Puppet is an issue to me.  I have some
machines where it takes 30 seconds for 'puppetd --onetime' to
complete, even when there is nothing to do.  That's annoyingly
long to wait when I have written a new class and am testing the
new manifests.  Only to find out that nothing happened, realize
I forgot to actually call include on the new class, and then
there's another half minute wait.

This is on pretty recent eight-core Opteron machines with
32 Gbyte RAM and sitting mostly idle.  It does include
plugin-syncing, though.

On the other hand, some other machines take just 10-11 seconds
to complete, even though there are more resource declarations
for them in the manifests.  It's not obvious why some machines
take longer to run Puppet than others, and I haven't had time
to investigate in more detail what causes that.  I'll have to
do that some day.

If the unattended runs (which I do every fourth hour from cron)
takes five or fifty seconds doesn't matter much to me, but the
wait during interactive development of the manifests is irritating.


/Bellman

--
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.

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: Magazine article comparing CPU usage of Puppet vs. Cfengine

[Trevor Vaughan]

Just out of curiosity, do the ones that take longer happen to be 64 bit?

Also, does using --tags do what you want in terms of testing speed?

Trevor

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 3:43 PM, Thomas Bellman  wrote:
> James Cammarata wrote:
>
>> Also, this doesn't seem to be CPU load, just time.  It took puppet longer
>> to apply a manifest than CFengine, I'm assuming they made the same changes
>> on both systems and had both CFengine and puppet correct the same
>> differences.  Wall clocks != higher load.
>>
>> In my opinion, this is a non-issue, since normally if you've got any major
>> number of systems you'll either be triggering runs in parallel, or they'll
>> be updating automatically on their own environment wide.
>
> The time it takes to run Puppet is an issue to me.  I have some
> machines where it takes 30 seconds for 'puppetd --onetime' to
> complete, even when there is nothing to do.  That's annoyingly
> long to wait when I have written a new class and am testing the
> new manifests.  Only to find out that nothing happened, realize
> I forgot to actually call include on the new class, and then
> there's another half minute wait.
>
> This is on pretty recent eight-core Opteron machines with
> 32 Gbyte RAM and sitting mostly idle.  It does include
> plugin-syncing, though.
>
> On the other hand, some other machines take just 10-11 seconds
> to complete, even though there are more resource declarations
> for them in the manifests.  It's not obvious why some machines
> take longer to run Puppet than others, and I haven't had time
> to investigate in more detail what causes that.  I'll have to
> do that some day.
>
> If the unattended runs (which I do every fourth hour from cron)
> takes five or fifty seconds doesn't matter much to me, but the
> wait during interactive development of the manifests is irritating.
>
>
>        /Bellman
>
> --
> 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.
>
>



-- 
Trevor Vaughan
Vice President, Onyx Point, Inc
(410) 541-6699
tvaug...@onyxpoint.com

-- This account not approved for unencrypted proprietary information --

-- 
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.

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: Magazine article comparing CPU usage of Puppet vs. Cfengine

[Jeff McCune]

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 12:58 PM, tobyriddell  wrote:
> The result was either to add entries to /etc/hosts or to confirm the
> contents of /etc/hosts.

I haven't read the article, but from this piece of information I'm
_highly_ skeptical of the results having much to do with puppet
itself.

I very much doubt that anyone with any credibility will state puppet
uses less CPU time than cfengine for similar tasks, but the authors
appear to have specifically selected an editfiles task which cfengine
does quite well and puppet does not have the native ability to manage.
 (Unless it's been added in recent releases...)

For reference:
"The hardest code to transition will be editfiles code, since Puppet
does not and probably never will provide an analogous feature.
Instead, you will need to use something like external templates or
create custom Puppet types."
>From http://reductivelabs.com/trac/puppet/wiki/TransitioningFromCfengine

If the author specifically focused on managing file contents like
entries in /etc/hosts, then puppetd CPU time will be a reflection of
how the author extended puppet to edit files.  Perhaps they just did
thousands of sed executions, or perhaps they wrote their own custom
type or leveraged the flexibility of templates.  Perhaps they used
augeas, which is specifically designed for this sort of thing.

It sounds like it would have been more apt for the paper to present
the experience the author went through to extend puppet to have
editfiles functionality.  I would be interested in a paper discussing
how cfengine may be extended to support some of the more useful
features of puppet.

-Jeff McCune

-- 
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.

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: Magazine article comparing CPU usage of Puppet vs. Cfengine

[Disconnect]

..or perhaps they used the native hosts type that exists to manage
/etc/hosts entries?

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 5:55 PM, Jeff McCune  wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 12:58 PM, tobyriddell 
> wrote:
> > The result was either to add entries to /etc/hosts or to confirm the
> > contents of /etc/hosts.
>
> I haven't read the article, but from this piece of information I'm
> _highly_ skeptical of the results having much to do with puppet
> itself.
>
> I very much doubt that anyone with any credibility will state puppet
> uses less CPU time than cfengine for similar tasks, but the authors
> appear to have specifically selected an editfiles task which cfengine
> does quite well and puppet does not have the native ability to manage.
>  (Unless it's been added in recent releases...)
>
> For reference:
> "The hardest code to transition will be editfiles code, since Puppet
> does not and probably never will provide an analogous feature.
> Instead, you will need to use something like external templates or
> create custom Puppet types."
> From http://reductivelabs.com/trac/puppet/wiki/TransitioningFromCfengine
>
> If the author specifically focused on managing file contents like
> entries in /etc/hosts, then puppetd CPU time will be a reflection of
> how the author extended puppet to edit files.  Perhaps they just did
> thousands of sed executions, or perhaps they wrote their own custom
> type or leveraged the flexibility of templates.  Perhaps they used
> augeas, which is specifically designed for this sort of thing.
>
> It sounds like it would have been more apt for the paper to present
> the experience the author went through to extend puppet to have
> editfiles functionality.  I would be interested in a paper discussing
> how cfengine may be extended to support some of the more useful
> features of puppet.
>
> -Jeff McCune
>
> --
> 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.

[Puppet Users] Re: Magazine article comparing CPU usage of Puppet vs. Cfengine

[Thomas Bellman]

Trevor Vaughan top-posted:


Just out of curiosity, do the ones that take longer happen to be 64 bit?


Well, yes, they are indeed 64 bit (x86_64).  But that doesn't
distinguish them from the quicker ones.  They are all running
CentOS 5.4 for x86_64, and they all have identical quad-core
Opteron CPUs and identical motherboards, RAID controllers, and
disks.

There are differences though; some machines have dual processors
(i.e. 8 cores) with 32 Gbyte RAM and run Xen, while some have
single processors with 16 Gbyte RAM and do not run Xen.  I haven't
seen any *obvious* correlation between speed and non-Xen, dom0 or
domU, or with amount of virtual CPU:s or RAM assigned to the
domains, but as I said I haven't really had time to analyze the
problem properly.


Also, does using --tags do what you want in terms of testing speed?


It does speed things up, yes.  I have tried to use it, but:

- You need to list all classes you have changed.  Easy if you
  have only touched one class, but sometimes changes affect
  multiple classes.  (They might all be included from some
  common class, but then you need to look up the name of that
  class.)

- When you use inheritance, it seems that you need to list the
  base class, not the class you actually include().

- I want to make a final test run with the entire configuration
  anyway, so I know I haven't broken something I didn't intend.
  If I don't use --tags I get that for free.

- The speedup isn't really that great.  It helps, but it only
  takes a slow node from 30 seconds to 20 seconds, or a quicker
  node from 15 to 10 seconds.

Altogether it means that remembering to use --tags is barely
worth it.


--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?

--
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.

Re: [Puppet Users] Re: Magazine article comparing CPU usage of Puppet vs. Cfengine

[Jeff McCune]

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 6:23 PM, Disconnect  wrote:
> ..or perhaps they used the native hosts type that exists to manage
> /etc/hosts entries?

Dooh, thank you.  I wish I could remove the previous email to prevent
my own misunderstanding from spreading.  I should go read the paper.

> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 5:55 PM, Jeff McCune  wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 12:58 PM, tobyriddell 
>> wrote:
>> > The result was either to add entries to /etc/hosts or to confirm the
>> > contents of /etc/hosts.
>>
>> I haven't read the article, but from this piece of information I'm
>> _highly_ skeptical of the results having much to do with puppet
>> itself.
>>
>> I very much doubt that anyone with any credibility will state puppet
>> uses less CPU time than cfengine for similar tasks, but the authors
>> appear to have specifically selected an editfiles task which cfengine
>> does quite well and puppet does not have the native ability to manage.
>>  (Unless it's been added in recent releases...)
>>
>> For reference:
>> "The hardest code to transition will be editfiles code, since Puppet
>> does not and probably never will provide an analogous feature.
>> Instead, you will need to use something like external templates or
>> create custom Puppet types."
>> From http://reductivelabs.com/trac/puppet/wiki/TransitioningFromCfengine
>>
>> If the author specifically focused on managing file contents like
>> entries in /etc/hosts, then puppetd CPU time will be a reflection of
>> how the author extended puppet to edit files.  Perhaps they just did
>> thousands of sed executions, or perhaps they wrote their own custom
>> type or leveraged the flexibility of templates.  Perhaps they used
>> augeas, which is specifically designed for this sort of thing.
>>
>> It sounds like it would have been more apt for the paper to present
>> the experience the author went through to extend puppet to have
>> editfiles functionality.  I would be interested in a paper discussing
>> how cfengine may be extended to support some of the more useful
>> features of puppet.
>>
>> -Jeff McCune
>>
>> --
>> 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.
>

-- 
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.

Re: [Puppet Users] Magazine article comparing CPU usage of Puppet vs. Cfengine

[Andrew Heagle]

On Monday 22 February 2010 16:17:52 Toby Riddell wrote:
> I received my copy of ;login (the Usenix magazine) today. There's an
> article* comparing CPU utilisation of Puppet and Cfengine. To
> abbreviate massively: Puppet requires much more CPU than Cfengine when
> both verifying and fixing configuration.
>
> *Article is here:
> http://www.usenix.org/publications/login/2010-02/pdfs/bjorgeengen.pdf.
> Note that reading the magazine article requires a subscription, at
> least until Feb 2011 (articles published more than 12 months ago are
> openly available).
>

I have this issue of the magazine as well. The system he used for testing is

an AMD Athlon XP2200, with 1GB RAM running on CentOS5.2 (kernel
2.6.18-92.1.22.el.i686)

The version of CFEngine he is running is 3.0.1b3
(released ??? Jan or Feb '09, sometime, maybe?)

The version of Puppet he is running is 0.24.7
(released 16-Dec-2008)

So, even though this article was just released, I think it was written a
year
ago. The author said these were the latest stable versions at the time of
writing.

Regards,
Andrew

-- 
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.

Re: [Puppet Users] Magazine article comparing CPU usage of Puppet vs. Cfengine

[James Turnbull]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 23/02/10 8:23 PM, Andrew Heagle wrote:
> The version of CFEngine he is running is 3.0.1b3
> (released ??? Jan or Feb '09, sometime, maybe?)
> 
> The version of Puppet he is running is 0.24.7
> (released 16-Dec-2008)

It's also important to note the world has moved a LOT since 0.24.7.
 The 0.25.x releases have considerable performance uplift in them IMHO.

Regards

James Turnbull

- -- 
Author of:
* Pro Linux System Administration (http://tinyurl.com/linuxadmin)
* Pulling Strings with Puppet (http://tinyurl.com/pupbook)
* Pro Nagios 2.0 (http://tinyurl.com/pronagios)
* Hardening Linux (http://tinyurl.com/hardeninglinux)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEVAwUBS4S4qiFa/lDkFHAyAQKidwf+K0L68Rc6mGjTS3MENltp0udHsh+/4o8R
uTQ2XS+Vn2mHZpM1wZTFTIZJYin2grOuYF9IiCXiDG8qvc7HM8dFF8a/09gg180c
lPjhleWz2+foN1cUHAPexGO8rvfVukfh62bmB9YoNHztAdT0vKV3zXuvG1Es16Fn
E0wy1PD5v7zzRPeZy7K5jP1WDKBugbQranZvefkVRz0mqGROvdhJ5GqTsZjbm3qm
mfZbGkkSUQJsJGl8sH07XKaw/q2XpSWNFKFLY4GRoecKClnpL7/3LxFyoWJuYcJk
7CUKHdJTWroKIcmcXUa3xlr/0hGyiXARA4JJK1lw22mXqF9c2yF/FA==
=x1VL
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
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.

[Puppet Users] /etc/hosts 'cname'?

[Dick Davies]

I want to use a CNAME as a level of indirection
( to point N webservers at the active mySQL replica).

I'd like to use /etc/hosts to avoid the DNS propagation delays.

I don't want to do away with DNS altogether though - is it possible to lookup
a hostname and pass that  IP to the hosts type? Something like:

# this gets used by several classes
$activedbhost = "mysql1.mydomain.com"

host { "db.hosting.mydomain.com":
   ensure => present,
   ip  => ip_of($activedbhost)
}

'ip_of()' is what Puppet calls a 'function', right?
Does anyone have a reference on how to write them -
the reductive labs docs seem a little broken today.

Or better still, has someone already written such a thing :)

-- 
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.

[Puppet Users] Puppet's call to /sbin/service somehow different than calling from the command line?

[Brian Ferris]

Long shot question, but I'm running out of ideas...

I'm running puppet-0.25.2 on Fedora boxes to manage a simple Java
service started through an /etc/init.d script.  I can start, stop,
restart, and examine the service status using the standard /sbin/
service command.  Works like a champ.

The issue is that when I use puppet to start the service, the service
fails to run.  Specifically, I have a basic 'service { "name": ensure
=> true }' defined.  I run "puppetd --test" and I see it changing the
status of the service from stopped to running, and yet my Java service
fails with random NoClassDefFound errors.

I keep coming back to the fact that I can run my example service with
a direct call to '/sbin/service name start' and everything works
fine.  Yet when Puppet makes that same call (I've seen it in the debug
logs), my service fails.  What's the difference in execution contexts?

Now, I know you're immediately going to guess that I have some
classpath setup incorrectly or a permissions problem or something.
Believe me, I've gone crazy looking for something... anything.  I've
stripped it down to the most basic set of classes.  I've added logging
every where.  I've looked at everything I can think of.  Comparing
puppet vs non-puppet, I can find no difference in the environment,
path, executable, limits, or anything else I can think of at the point
of service execution.

Does anyone have an ideas, hints, or even vague notions of why
Puppet's service execution might be somehow different?  I'm certainly
out of ideas to try.

Thanks,
Brian

-- 
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.

Re: [Puppet Users] Puppet's call to /sbin/service somehow different than calling from the command line?

[Craig Miskell]

Does anyone have an ideas, hints, or even vague notions of why
Puppet's service execution might be somehow different?  I'm certainly
out of ideas to try.
One item you didn't mention in your list of things you've checked, so 
I'll bring it up:  Environment variables.


Don't know which ones might be important though :); you could use "set" 
or "env" in the service startup script and dump the output to a text 
file, then compare the state between a terminal invocation and that from 
puppet.  See what's different and go from there.


Craig Miskell

--
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.