What about replace => false. If the file is not there we dont need
checksums because we know we have to copy the file. If the file is
present we dont need to calculate checksums because we wont replace
anyway. I think thats a valid usecase where you have a source property
and no checksum parameter.

> One of the problems with this model, though, is that there's a semantic 
> difference between writing the file out and not - if you've got a service 
> that needs to get restarted if the file changes, but not if it doesn't, then 
> you can't just write it out every time.
> 
> On Dec 16, 2010, at 7:49 PM, Trevor Vaughan wrote:
> > I disagree.
> > 
> > Look at the concat module. Why waste resources checksumming when it
> > would be more efficient to just write out the file?
> > 
> > Read + Checksum + (potential) Write is more I/O and CPU intensive than
> > Write.
> > 
> > Trevor
> > 
> > On 12/16/2010 07:25 PM, Nigel Kersten wrote:
> >> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 2:55 PM, Jesse A Wolfe <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> 
> >> Note that we changed the desired behavior to fail with a syntax error 
> >> instead.
> >> 
> >> It doesn't make sense to not checksum and specify content/source.

-Stefan

Attachment: pgpLr9A81qULf.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to