> On May 20, 2020, at 4:07 PM, Robert O Butts <[email protected]> wrote: > > While we're changing it, thoughts on descriptive text instead of numbers for > enums? `insert_request_via: basic_transaction_codes` instead of > `insert_request_via: 2` ?
Yeh, that’s something someone has been asking for for a long time. The complication is that this means some more universal parsing mechanism, such that the overridable configurations can call the right “parser” for each configuration. Very doable, just more complex C++17 mad code. Some of it will be easy (“on” / “off”), but others are not (as your example). Lets not write box in the configuration values though :). This would be the time to do that as well, break records.config once, and be done with it. — Leif > > > On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 3:52 PM Leif Hedstrom <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > >> On May 20, 2020, at 3:35 PM, Alan Carroll <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Dang, you guys were all "flat name space!" at the hackathon. >> >> As you can see from my example, I did clean up the name space a bit and >> removed a "config" from those (e.g. "proxy.config.http.cache" is the current >> name). We could remove "proxy" as well. > > > Pretty sure I would not have agreed to keep the existing name space. I don’t > consider the one we have “flat” though, it’s definitely a hierarchy. However, > that hierarchy is not well designed, definitely not well maintained and > absolutely not consistent. > > My suggestion is, when we do this, lets also clean this up. As a bonus, it’s > likely that the same hierarchy could be incorporated into how we use Debug(), > to make it a lot more easy to trace on some particular portion of the > feature/configuration hierarchy, and have it do so reliably. The bonus here > then is that we have one name space to maintain, and document. > > — Leif >> >> Sudheer's question is a good one that I"ve been pondering. >> >> 1) This would only be "records.config". It's too much to convert everything >> to YAML, but every file we change is one step closer to full YAML. ("Never >> go full YAML" - Leif) >> >> 2) Overrides would need to use the full name. For the flat style this is >> trivial because that's the same as the key name. For the tree, we'd need a >> notation to indicate descent along the objects. A simple rule would be to >> forbid a name to contain "." and then use "." as a separator that indicates >> to descend. Then the names would again be exactly as they are now and no >> changes would be needed. This isn't really any different from file system >> paths or FQDNs, so I don't think it will be a large hurdle for ATS ops >> people. >> >> On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 3:22 PM Leif Hedstrom <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> IF we are going down this path, we should restructure the configuration name >> space now too. A lot of things makes no sense any more, including the proxy. >> prefix. >> >> I do agree with Randal though, we should use proper YAML structure for the >> name spaces, for both configurations and metrics. >> >> — leif >> >> >>> On May 20, 2020, at 1:18 PM, Randall Meyer <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> I vote for #2, though I could live with either. >>> >>> -r >>> >>> On Wednesday, May 20, 2020, 11:09:25 AM PDT, Alan Carroll >>> <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> If "records.config" is changed to be YAML for ATS 10, there are two >>> reasonable approaches to changing it. >>> >>> Option 1) Use a flat namespace. The file would look something like >>> >>> config: >>> proxy.http.cache: true >>> proxy.http.insert_request_via_str: 2 >>> proxy.http.chunking_enabled: true >>> proxy.dns.resolv_conf: "/etc/resolv.conf" >>> # .... etc. >>> >>> Option 2) Use a tree. The file would look something like >>> >>> config: >>> proxy: >>> http: >>> cache: true >>> insert_request_via: 2 >>> chunking_enabled: true >>> dns: >>> resolv_conf: "/etc/resolv.conf" >>> >>> From an automation point of view these are not really different - there is >>> an obvious isomorphism between them such that converting between them is >>> trivial. >>> >>> Any comments? >>> >> >
