Thanks for the positive feedback Andy!
I'm wondering if there would be a way of saying "all of these installations
> are for the same 'site'". That would remove a module looking popular simply
> because it is installed a lot, but only by two or three groups. Maybe that
> information is valuable,
It’s not just you.
Further as someone who remains a JVM skeptic (and caveat: former PL employee),
PuppetDB is one of the cleanest/nicest pieces of engineering I’ve seen PL
produce.
That’s not to say I don’t have issues with bits of it (what software do I not
have issues with?) PuppetDB is some
On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 3:57 PM, Spencer Krum wrote:
> Hi Puppet-dev,
>
> I've been working, with a lot of help from some others, on a new project
> at http://puppet-analytics.org. It is very much in the
> experimental/development phase and I'm looking for feedback and help.
>
> The goal of this p
Hi,
Maybe it's me but I find the way you started this discussion extremely rude
and at some point offensive. You jettison in here with random claims of
ugliness and slowness and that acitve_record was a better fit. I don't know
what you're trying to achieve but you might want to work on how you
> On Sep 8, 2014, at 6:44 AM, Bomber wrote:
>
> Is any plans to implement lightweight puppetdb replacement for storeconfigs?
> PuppetDB is ugly, i.e. has junkie API and _very_ heavy by itself because of
> JVM, henve it is almost impossible to use it for testing masterless
> environments, old ac
Is any plans to implement lightweight puppetdb replacement for
storeconfigs? PuppetDB is ugly, i.e. has junkie API and _very_ heavy by
itself because of JVM, henve it is almost impossible to use it for testing
masterless environments, old active_record implementation was a solution,
PuppetDB is
