On Aug 26, 2010, at 11:27 AM, Nigel Kersten wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 10:09 PM, Luke Kanies <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Aug 25, 2010, at 1:53 PM, Nigel Kersten wrote:
>> 
>>> On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 11:17 AM, Luke Kanies <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> 
>>>> Rein, Paul, and I had a call today discussing whether we should produce a 
>>>> 1.6 (I said no, unless there are high priority tickets that really need to 
>>>> be worked on), and then what the design goals of 2.0 should be.  I took 
>>>> notes on our discussion and atempted to produce a doc capturing it all:
>>>> 
>>>> http://projects.puppetlabs.com/projects/facter/wiki/ArchitectureForTwoDotOh
>>> 
>>> I have a few thoughts churning around about Facter having native
>>> support for storing fact evaluation history on the client, which ties
>>> into the open feature request for caching fact values, and I noticed
>>> you reference a ttl option in #4565.
>>> 
>> 
>> It'd be great to hear these.
> 
> So I feel that it would be immensely useful for Facter to optionally
> store a certain amount of historical data about the fact evaluation.
> 
> It would be great to be able to simply interrogate info like "when did
> the amount of RAM in this machine change?" "what is my kernel version
> history?" etc etc.
> 
> To get there however, we need a persistent store for facts, which
> seems to tie in quite nicely to the idea of having certain facts be
> cached, and easily marked as "refresh once per boot" etc.
> 
> Facter becomes much more useful as a standalone product with these
> capabilities, and ideally we could hook Puppet/Puppet Dashboard into
> this to store historical fact data. We could do this at the
> Puppet/Dashboard layer, but if we decided to accept the feature
> request for caching fact evaluation, then it appears to make more
> sense to have Facter support this directly.

Interesting.  So in this scenario, Facter would develop a decent bit of its own 
functionality - maybe not a daemon, but at least long-term storage.

Would it be acceptable if, say, the puppet agent provided a simple interface to 
the server-side fact storage, which will already have this?  We're working on 
designing something like this right now, although it's more mental goo than 
real ideas right now.

-- 
A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely
rearranging their prejudices.  -- William James
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Luke Kanies  -|-   http://puppetlabs.com   -|-   +1(615)594-8199




-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en.

Reply via email to