Re: [Puppet Users] Re: How to manage many nodes easily?
What a good solution! Thanks a lot!
2011/6/24 Nan Liu n...@puppetlabs.com
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 7:43 PM, flex frostyn...@gmail.com wrote:
er...that's what we use now, but define and external node cannot use
together, we want to use external node to manage nodes configuration
easily,
so that's why i want to change all the define to class
ENC doesn't support resources, and defines are custom resources,
however we can still support ENC by defining this in an app class:
class app { $software ) {
app::deploy { $software: }
}
define app::deploy {
app:: add { $name:
path = /var/$name
}
}
node some_system {
class { app:
software = ['app1', 'app2', 'app3'],
}
}
ENC support for parametrized class was added in 2.6.5+. If you need to
pass custom parameters to the resource, use a hash or write a wrapper
class for create_resource function to handle any complex usage, and
that function can be backported from 2.7 to 2.6.x.
Thanks,
Nan
2011/6/23 Martin Alfke tux...@gmail.com
On 06/23/2011 11:52 AM, flex wrote:
But i think class is singletons, means when using class you can not
get
more than one copy of the resource, that's the biggest difference
between class and define.
Your example give a duplicate definition error in my environment.
So is this my fault or there another way?
You are right. Using class does not work here. But you can use a define
with parameters and call the define with parameters later on:
define application::add ($appname) {
file { /var/$appname:
ensure = directory,
}
}
node 'node1' {
application::add { app1: appname = app1 }
application::add { app3: appname = app3 }
}
node 'node2' {
application::add { app2: appname = app2 }
application::add { anyname: appname = app4 }
}
When calling the define you just have to make sure that the give name is
uniq.
2011/6/23 Martin Alfke tux...@gmail.com mailto:tux...@gmail.com
On Jun 23, 7:44 am, Martin Alfke tux...@gmail.com
mailto:tux...@gmail.com wrote:
On 06/23/2011 04:35 AM, flex wrote:
These is another question, i have many defines which will
apply
an
application to sepcified path, called as:
application::add { app1: path = /var/app1 }
by this i can apply app1 and app2 in node1, app3 and app4 in
node2, etc.
now, how do i switch this to a class? Need i create a seperate
class for
all the apps although the only difference is the path?
You can make use of parameterized classes:
class application::add($appname) {
path = '/var/${appname}',
...
}
Within your node definition you call the class with desired
parameter:
node 'node1' {
class application::add { appname = 'app1' }
class application::add { appname = 'app3' }
}
The mentioned usage of parameterized classes in node definition is
wrong.
See:
http://docs.puppetlabs.com/guides/language_guide.html#parameterised-classes
node 'node1' {
class { 'application::app': appname = 'app1' }
class { 'application::add': appname = 'app3' }
}
Kind regards,
Martin
2011/6/21 Chris Phillips ch...@untrepid.com
mailto:ch...@untrepid.com mailto:ch...@untrepid.com
mailto:ch...@untrepid.com
I would see a principle whereby nodes should not ever be
defined
within the manifest code at all. To me the manifests
should
be
written to be very generic, and then use ENC's to modify
their
behaviour at a user level. There is still a lot of
inconsistency
within Puppet as to how device specific data can be
obtained
(extlookup is very useful but rides roughshod over other
architectural principles) but I try to stick to keeping
all
manifests generic. I write manifests to manage a package,
then
create a group in dashboard to relate that function to a
business
need and then a node into that group.
On 21 June 2011 14:48, Martin Willemsma
mwillem...@gmail.com mailto:mwillem...@gmail.com
mailto:mwillem...@gmail.com mailto:mwillem...@gmail.com
wrote:
We use /etc/puppet/node-definitions/*.pp in site.pp
similar to
what Carles is saying.
[node-definitions] is a git repo thats being synced on
both
puppermasters. This happens on every push to origin
We use the
Re: [Puppet Users] Re: How to manage many nodes easily?
But i think class is singletons, means when using class you can not get more
than one copy of the resource, that's the biggest difference between class
and define.
Your example give a duplicate definition error in my environment.
So is this my fault or there another way?
2011/6/23 Martin Alfke tux...@gmail.com
On Jun 23, 7:44 am, Martin Alfke tux...@gmail.com wrote:
On 06/23/2011 04:35 AM, flex wrote:
These is another question, i have many defines which will apply an
application to sepcified path, called as:
application::add { app1: path = /var/app1 }
by this i can apply app1 and app2 in node1, app3 and app4 in node2,
etc.
now, how do i switch this to a class? Need i create a seperate class
for
all the apps although the only difference is the path?
You can make use of parameterized classes:
class application::add($appname) {
path = '/var/${appname}',
...
}
Within your node definition you call the class with desired parameter:
node 'node1' {
class application::add { appname = 'app1' }
class application::add { appname = 'app3' }
}
The mentioned usage of parameterized classes in node definition is
wrong.
See:
http://docs.puppetlabs.com/guides/language_guide.html#parameterised-classes
node 'node1' {
class { 'application::app': appname = 'app1' }
class { 'application::add': appname = 'app3' }
}
Kind regards,
Martin
2011/6/21 Chris Phillips ch...@untrepid.com mailto:
ch...@untrepid.com
I would see a principle whereby nodes should not ever be defined
within the manifest code at all. To me the manifests should be
written to be very generic, and then use ENC's to modify their
behaviour at a user level. There is still a lot of inconsistency
within Puppet as to how device specific data can be obtained
(extlookup is very useful but rides roughshod over other
architectural principles) but I try to stick to keeping all
manifests generic. I write manifests to manage a package, then
create a group in dashboard to relate that function to a business
need and then a node into that group.
On 21 June 2011 14:48, Martin Willemsma mwillem...@gmail.com
mailto:mwillem...@gmail.com wrote:
We use /etc/puppet/node-definitions/*.pp in site.pp similar to
what Carles is saying.
[node-definitions] is a git repo thats being synced on both
puppermasters. This happens on every push to origin
We use the 'default' node which does the baseline configuration
based on a 'role'
In a separate file $fqdn.pp I place the definitions for a node.
Are there more people using this kind of approach?
---
Martin
2011/6/21 Carles Amig� carles.am...@softonic.com
mailto:carles.am...@softonic.com
We had the same problem and we just separated each node (or
group of nodes) in one file and then we load them using the
following syntax:
import nodes/*.pp
You could also organize those files in subdirectories if
you
like so:
import nodes/*/*.pp
The only problem we've found with this approach is when
creating new files, puppetmaster takes a while to see
them.
El 20/06/2011 5:25, flex escribi�:
We have many modules and many nodes, every node may use
different
module, so it's very unpleasant to modify the nodes.pp
Then i saw the external node, but seems it only support
class and we
have many defines called in node.pp
So here is my question: Is there another way for us to
manage so many
nodes easily or should i change all the defines to
classes and using
external nodes?
--
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
mailto:puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@__googlegroups.com
mailto:puppet-users%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/__group/puppet-users?hl=en
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
Re: [Puppet Users] Re: How to manage many nodes easily?
On 06/23/2011 11:52 AM, flex wrote:
But i think class is singletons, means when using class you can not get
more than one copy of the resource, that's the biggest difference
between class and define.
Your example give a duplicate definition error in my environment.
So is this my fault or there another way?
You are right. Using class does not work here. But you can use a define
with parameters and call the define with parameters later on:
define application::add ($appname) {
file { /var/$appname:
ensure = directory,
}
}
node 'node1' {
application::add { app1: appname = app1 }
application::add { app3: appname = app3 }
}
node 'node2' {
application::add { app2: appname = app2 }
application::add { anyname: appname = app4 }
}
When calling the define you just have to make sure that the give name is
uniq.
2011/6/23 Martin Alfke tux...@gmail.com mailto:tux...@gmail.com
On Jun 23, 7:44 am, Martin Alfke tux...@gmail.com
mailto:tux...@gmail.com wrote:
On 06/23/2011 04:35 AM, flex wrote:
These is another question, i have many defines which will apply an
application to sepcified path, called as:
application::add { app1: path = /var/app1 }
by this i can apply app1 and app2 in node1, app3 and app4 in
node2, etc.
now, how do i switch this to a class? Need i create a seperate
class for
all the apps although the only difference is the path?
You can make use of parameterized classes:
class application::add($appname) {
path = '/var/${appname}',
...
}
Within your node definition you call the class with desired parameter:
node 'node1' {
class application::add { appname = 'app1' }
class application::add { appname = 'app3' }
}
The mentioned usage of parameterized classes in node definition is
wrong.
See:
http://docs.puppetlabs.com/guides/language_guide.html#parameterised-classes
node 'node1' {
class { 'application::app': appname = 'app1' }
class { 'application::add': appname = 'app3' }
}
Kind regards,
Martin
2011/6/21 Chris Phillips ch...@untrepid.com
mailto:ch...@untrepid.com mailto:ch...@untrepid.com
mailto:ch...@untrepid.com
I would see a principle whereby nodes should not ever be defined
within the manifest code at all. To me the manifests should be
written to be very generic, and then use ENC's to modify their
behaviour at a user level. There is still a lot of
inconsistency
within Puppet as to how device specific data can be obtained
(extlookup is very useful but rides roughshod over other
architectural principles) but I try to stick to keeping all
manifests generic. I write manifests to manage a package, then
create a group in dashboard to relate that function to a
business
need and then a node into that group.
On 21 June 2011 14:48, Martin Willemsma
mwillem...@gmail.com mailto:mwillem...@gmail.com
mailto:mwillem...@gmail.com mailto:mwillem...@gmail.com
wrote:
We use /etc/puppet/node-definitions/*.pp in site.pp
similar to
what Carles is saying.
[node-definitions] is a git repo thats being synced on both
puppermasters. This happens on every push to origin
We use the 'default' node which does the baseline
configuration
based on a 'role'
In a separate file $fqdn.pp I place the definitions for
a node.
Are there more people using this kind of approach?
---
Martin
2011/6/21 Carles Amig� carles.am...@softonic.com
mailto:carles.am...@softonic.com
mailto:carles.am...@softonic.com
mailto:carles.am...@softonic.com
We had the same problem and we just separated each
node (or
group of nodes) in one file and then we load them
using the
following syntax:
import nodes/*.pp
You could also organize those files in
subdirectories if you
like so:
import nodes/*/*.pp
The only problem we've found with this approach is when
creating new files, puppetmaster takes a while to
see them.
El 20/06/2011 5:25, flex escribi�:
We have many modules and many nodes, every node
may use
different
[Puppet Users] Re: How to manage many nodes easily?
On Jun 23, 7:44 am, Martin Alfke tux...@gmail.com wrote:
On 06/23/2011 04:35 AM, flex wrote:
These is another question, i have many defines which will apply an
application to sepcified path, called as:
application::add { app1: path = /var/app1 }
by this i can apply app1 and app2 in node1, app3 and app4 in node2, etc.
now, how do i switch this to a class? Need i create a seperate class for
all the apps although the only difference is the path?
You can make use of parameterized classes:
class application::add($appname) {
path = '/var/${appname}',
...
}
Within your node definition you call the class with desired parameter:
node 'node1' {
class application::add { appname = 'app1' }
class application::add { appname = 'app3' }
}
The mentioned usage of parameterized classes in node definition is
wrong.
See: http://docs.puppetlabs.com/guides/language_guide.html#parameterised-classes
node 'node1' {
class { 'application::app': appname = 'app1' }
class { 'application::add': appname = 'app3' }
}
Kind regards,
Martin
2011/6/21 Chris Phillips ch...@untrepid.com mailto:ch...@untrepid.com
I would see a principle whereby nodes should not ever be defined
within the manifest code at all. To me the manifests should be
written to be very generic, and then use ENC's to modify their
behaviour at a user level. There is still a lot of inconsistency
within Puppet as to how device specific data can be obtained
(extlookup is very useful but rides roughshod over other
architectural principles) but I try to stick to keeping all
manifests generic. I write manifests to manage a package, then
create a group in dashboard to relate that function to a business
need and then a node into that group.
On 21 June 2011 14:48, Martin Willemsma mwillem...@gmail.com
mailto:mwillem...@gmail.com wrote:
We use /etc/puppet/node-definitions/*.pp in site.pp similar to
what Carles is saying.
[node-definitions] is a git repo thats being synced on both
puppermasters. This happens on every push to origin
We use the 'default' node which does the baseline configuration
based on a 'role'
In a separate file $fqdn.pp I place the definitions for a node.
Are there more people using this kind of approach?
---
Martin
2011/6/21 Carles Amig� carles.am...@softonic.com
mailto:carles.am...@softonic.com
We had the same problem and we just separated each node (or
group of nodes) in one file and then we load them using the
following syntax:
import nodes/*.pp
You could also organize those files in subdirectories if you
like so:
import nodes/*/*.pp
The only problem we've found with this approach is when
creating new files, puppetmaster takes a while to see them.
El 20/06/2011 5:25, flex escribi�:
We have many modules and many nodes, every node may use
different
module, so it's very unpleasant to modify the nodes.pp
Then i saw the external node, but seems it only support
class and we
have many defines called in node.pp
So here is my question: Is there another way for us to
manage so many
nodes easily or should i change all the defines to
classes and using
external nodes?
--
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
mailto:puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@__googlegroups.com
mailto:puppet-users%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/__group/puppet-users?hl=en
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-users@googlegroups.com
mailto:puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
mailto:puppet-users%2bunsubscr...@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
