Kaspar Schiess wrote:
Hi everyone,
Just wanted to tell you a little story. We've been enthusiastic puppet
users since about a year ago here at the Geographic Institute of the
University of Zürich.
But we won't use the zpool type ever again. Its just not worth it.
Here's what happened:
. one of our servers lost knowledge about one of its zfs pools
. puppet didn't find the pool and .. went on to zpool create it
. we did indeed have a backup, but would have lost all data if not
Creating zpools is a manual thing in every case, since one has to know
the devices participating. The names of which tend to be a little bit
different from one server to the next.
Add that to the possibility of major data loss (like we just
experienced) and get a negative yield for the 'zpool' type.
Hoping to inspire a few..
kaspar
Thunderbird and/or GMail just flaked so apologies if this is sent twice:
I see this as being distinctly part of the provisioning portion of a
server life-cycle. I haven't looked at the discussion on -dev, but i'm
not sure these types really belong in core puppet. They're not
unix-agnostic resources for one (has that fundamental bit of philosophy
changed?), and they're unlikely to change in a way that you want puppet
to 'correct'.
That being said, some people have 'bootstrap' envs, which would be a
better place to have these destructive resources than in your production
environment.
--
Joe McDonagh
AIM: YoosingYoonickz
IRC: joe-mac on freenode
L'ennui est contre-révolutionnaire
--
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.
