Puppet users - Nov 2012 - Pass Array as param to custom provider...

Afternoon all

Is it possible to pass an array of key=value pairs to a provider param, and 
have the provider split and handle each key=value pair? 

Basically, I''ve defined a new provider and type as follows: 
http://pastebin.com/WdekYPAh

I''ve set ''*:array_matching => all*'' on the
relevant newparam.

However the puppet run is failing as follows:

Error: Could not set ''present'' on ensure: $_ value need to be
String (nil 
> given) at 48:/etc/puppet/manifests/site.pp
> Error: Could not set ''present'' on ensure: $_ value need
to be String (nil
> given) at 48:/etc/puppet/manifests/site.pp
> Wrapped exception:
> $_ value need to be String (nil given)
> Error: 
>
/Stage[main]//Node[actint-star-nactl01]/Netapp_volume_options[v_puppet_test12111508]/ensure:
> change from absent to present failed: Could not set
''present'' on ensure: $_
> value need to be String (nil given) at 48:/etc/puppet/manifests/site.pp
>
Debug logging shows:
>  ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::netapp_volume_options: checking 
> value of Netapp Volume option on Volume v_puppet_test12111508
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::netapp_volume_options: setting 
> Netapp Volume options against volume v_puppet_test12111508.
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::netapp_volume_options: Options: 
> x=ay=b
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::netapp_volume_options: Option: x=a
>
So it looks to me like it''s getting the values correctly, and its
trying to
iterate through each value.  

If I strip out the code on line 17-19, then the logs show the following 
additional line. The puppet run also completes without error. 
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::netapp_volume_options: Option: y=b
>
So, any ideas???

Thanks in advance for any replies. 

Regards
Gavin  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/neCIMOkh1JUJ.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

On Tuesday, November 13, 2012 8:47:00 AM UTC-6, Gavin Williams
wrote:
>
> Afternoon all
>
> Is it possible to pass an array of key=value pairs to a provider param, 
> and have the provider split and handle each key=value pair? 
>
> Basically, I''ve defined a new provider and type as follows: 
> http://pastebin.com/WdekYPAh
>

I can''t see your code because pastebin is blocked to me, but I may be
able
to give you some advice anyway:

   1. You can pass an array of key=value pairs as a parameter to a 
   provider, and the provider can parse it any way you like.
   2. BUT you should not try to populate *other* parameters'' values
that
   way.  If you define a parameter that accepts a complex, structured value, 
   then the entire value belongs to the parameter to which it is assigned.
   3. Wouldn''t a hash be a better fit to the data than an array of 
   key/value pairs anyway?

What are you trying to achieve by this approach?  There is likely a better 
way.


John

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/yDOmbdqEY_sJ.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

John

Cheers for the response.

As per my other threads, I''m writing a NetApp Network device module for
Puppet.

One of the functions required is the ability to set ''options''
against a
given volume.
What I want to do is create a provider that accepts a volume name and a
list of volume options with their corresponding settings, and then iterate
through the provided list making a webservice call for each option.

So to give a better example of the provider in pastebin:
        netapp_volume_options { ''v_puppet_test12111508'':
                options => [''convert_ucode=on'',
''no_atime_update=on''],
        }

Have just pushed my latest code to Github here:
https://github.com/fatmcgav/fatmcgav-netapp/tree/master/lib/puppet/provider/netapp_volume_options

I did manage to get it working after a bit of googling... However am happy
to take suggestions if there is a better method :)

Cheers
Gavin



On 13 November 2012 15:12, jcbollinger <John.Bollinger@stjude.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Tuesday, November 13, 2012 8:47:00 AM UTC-6, Gavin Williams wrote:
>>
>> Afternoon all
>>
>> Is it possible to pass an array of key=value pairs to a provider param,
>> and have the provider split and handle each key=value pair?
>>
>> Basically, I''ve defined a new provider and type as follows:
>> http://pastebin.com/WdekYPAh
>>
>
>
> I can''t see your code because pastebin is blocked to me, but I may
be able
> to give you some advice anyway:
>
>    1. You can pass an array of key=value pairs as a parameter to a
>    provider, and the provider can parse it any way you like.
>    2. BUT you should not try to populate *other* parameters''
values that
>    way.  If you define a parameter that accepts a complex, structured
value,
>    then the entire value belongs to the parameter to which it is assigned.
>    3. Wouldn''t a hash be a better fit to the data than an array of
>    key/value pairs anyway?
>
> What are you trying to achieve by this approach?  There is likely a better
> way.
>
>
> John
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Puppet Users" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/yDOmbdqEY_sJ.
> To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> puppet-users+unsubscribe@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
"Puppet Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 7:33 AM, fatmcgav <fatmcgav@gmail.com> wrote:
> One of the functions required is the ability to set
''options'' against a
> given volume.
> What I want to do is create a provider that accepts a volume name and a
> list of volume options with their corresponding settings, and then iterate
> through the provided list making a webservice call for each option.
>
> So to give a better example of the provider in pastebin:
>         netapp_volume_options { ''v_puppet_test12111508'':
>                 options => [''convert_ucode=on'',
''no_atime_update=on''],
>         }
>
Yeah this seems to make more sense as a hash:

options => { ''convert_ucode'' => ''on'',
''no_atime_update'' => ''on'' }

I''m assuming this is just parameter, if it''s a property add
the following
method to the type and you should get a reasonable output:

def should_to_s(v)
  v.inspect
end

def is_to_s(v)
  v.inspect
end

Thanks,

Nan

-- 
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.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

Nan

Cheers for the response.

Yes this is just a parameter...

What''s the easiest way to work with them in the provider?

Cheers
Gavin
On Nov 13, 2012 7:00 PM, "Nan Liu" <nan@puppetlabs.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 7:33 AM, fatmcgav <fatmcgav@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> One of the functions required is the ability to set
''options'' against a
>> given volume.
>> What I want to do is create a provider that accepts a volume name and a
>> list of volume options with their corresponding settings, and then
iterate
>> through the provided list making a webservice call for each option.
>>
>> So to give a better example of the provider in pastebin:
>>         netapp_volume_options {
''v_puppet_test12111508'':
>>                 options => [''convert_ucode=on'',
''no_atime_update=on''],
>>         }
>>
>
> Yeah this seems to make more sense as a hash:
>
> options => { ''convert_ucode'' =>
''on'', ''no_atime_update'' =>
''on'' }
>
> I''m assuming this is just parameter, if it''s a property
add the following
> method to the type and you should get a reasonable output:
>
> def should_to_s(v)
>   v.inspect
> end
>
> def is_to_s(v)
>   v.inspect
> end
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nan
>
> --
> 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.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> puppet-users+unsubscribe@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
"Puppet Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

After a quick google, came up with:

#!/usr/bin/env ruby
>
> grades = { "Bob" => 82,
>            "Jim" => 94,
>            "Billy" => 58
>          }
>
> grades.each do|name,grade|
>   puts "#{name}: #{grade}"
> end

So now all I need to do is pull the existing options values and compile a 
hash to compare in the exists?, and use the above in the create... 

Quick question on the create - how will it handle one property that 
matches, but one property that doesn''t? 

Cheers
Gavin 

On Tuesday, 13 November 2012 19:04:31 UTC, Gavin Williams
wrote:
>
> Nan 
>
> Cheers for the response. 
>
> Yes this is just a parameter... 
>
> What''s the easiest way to work with them in the provider? 
>
> Cheers 
> Gavin 
> On Nov 13, 2012 7:00 PM, "Nan Liu" <nan@puppetlabs.com>
wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 7:33 AM, fatmcgav <fatmcgav@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>
>>> One of the functions required is the ability to set
''options'' against a
>>> given volume. 
>>> What I want to do is create a provider that accepts a volume name
and a
>>> list of volume options with their corresponding settings, and then
iterate
>>> through the provided list making a webservice call for each option.
>>>
>>> So to give a better example of the provider in pastebin: 
>>>         netapp_volume_options {
''v_puppet_test12111508'':
>>>                 options =>
[''convert_ucode=on'', ''no_atime_update=on''],
>>>         }
>>>
>>
>> Yeah this seems to make more sense as a hash:
>>
>> options => { ''convert_ucode'' =>
''on'', ''no_atime_update'' =>
''on'' }
>>
>> I''m assuming this is just parameter, if it''s a
property add the following
>> method to the type and you should get a reasonable output:
>>
>> def should_to_s(v)
>>   v.inspect
>> end
>>
>> def is_to_s(v)
>>   v.inspect
>> end
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Nan
>>
>> -- 
>> 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.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
>> puppet-users+unsubscribe@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
"Puppet Users" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/mc453A4A648J.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Gavin Williams <fatmcgav@gmail.com>
wrote:
> After a quick google, came up with:
>
> #!/usr/bin/env ruby
>>
>> grades = { "Bob" => 82,
>>            "Jim" => 94,
>>            "Billy" => 58
>>          }
>>
>> grades.each do|name,grade|
>>   puts "#{name}: #{grade}"
>> end
>
>
> So now all I need to do is pull the existing options values and compile a
> hash to compare in the exists?, and use the above in the create...


Quick question on the create - how will it handle one property
that
> matches, but one property that doesn''t?
>
You need a hash diff between current values and desired values and iterate
through the difference. Hash properties are a bit more work, because the
retrieve method may return more options than you care to set. You have the
option to either munge and include default value to the user supplied
value, or override insync? method so the comparison operation does not
invoke option= method if the user specified value is a subset of the return
hash from the option method.

Alternatively if you only have a short number of options, you can just
implement them as properties instead.

Thanks,

Nan

-- 
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.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

Nan

Cheers again...

Looks like overriding the ''insync?'' method is the way to go,
as I''m only
interested in checking/setting property values that are being passed
through...

Any insync? examples that I could refer to?

Cheers
Gavin


On 13 November 2012 19:50, Nan Liu <nan@puppetlabs.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Gavin Williams
<fatmcgav@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> After a quick google, came up with:
>>
>> #!/usr/bin/env ruby
>>>
>>> grades = { "Bob" => 82,
>>>            "Jim" => 94,
>>>            "Billy" => 58
>>>          }
>>>
>>> grades.each do|name,grade|
>>>   puts "#{name}: #{grade}"
>>> end
>>
>>
>> So now all I need to do is pull the existing options values and compile
a
>> hash to compare in the exists?, and use the above in the create...
>
>
>
> Quick question on the create - how will it handle one property that
>> matches, but one property that doesn''t?
>>
>
> You need a hash diff between current values and desired values and iterate
> through the difference. Hash properties are a bit more work, because the
> retrieve method may return more options than you care to set. You have the
> option to either munge and include default value to the user supplied
> value, or override insync? method so the comparison operation does not
> invoke option= method if the user specified value is a subset of the return
> hash from the option method.
>
> Alternatively if you only have a short number of options, you can just
> implement them as properties instead.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nan
>
> --
> 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.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> puppet-users+unsubscribe@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
"Puppet Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 11:58 AM, fatmcgav <fatmcgav@gmail.com> wrote:
> Looks like overriding the ''insync?'' method is the way to
go, as I''m only
> interested in checking/setting property values that are being passed
> through...
>
> Any insync? examples that I could refer to?
>
There''s a simple example here:
https://github.com/puppetlabs/puppetlabs-f5/blob/master/lib/puppet/type/f5_virtualserver.rb#L13-15

Search puppet source code lib/puppet/type/ for additional ones.

Thanks,

Nan

-- 
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.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

Ok, I''ve just pushed the latest code to Github: 
https://github.com/fatmcgav/fatmcgav-netapp/commit/d5ae999fc49b1de6726e8f4b7027648cf2eb64a2

I''ve managed to get the *create *functioning correctly, and updating
the
NetApp options as required. 

*exists?* has also been fleshed out a lot. 
Logic is that it will pull back a list of the current options set against 
the referenced volume, and then construct a hash of the returned key=>value 
pairs. 
The matching keys are then pulled from the current options and the setting 
options hashes, and the values of those keys compared. 
If they are different, then the *create *should be triggered. 

This is working fine in principle. 

However the current issue is that the *exists?* will *return false*whenever a
single property value doesn''t match. The create will then
process the whole list of setting options, rather than just the mis-matched 
one(s)... 

An example run gives: 

^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::netapp_volume_options: Matched Name
> no_atime_update. Current value = off. New value = on
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::netapp_volume_options: 
> no_atime_update values don''t match.
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: setting 
> Netapp Volume options against volume v_puppet_test12111508.
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Setting = 
> no_atime_update, Value = on
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Volume Option 
> no_atime_update set against Volume v_puppet_test12111508.
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Setting = 
> convert_ucode, Value = on
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Volume Option 
> convert_ucode set against Volume v_puppet_test12111508.
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Volume 
> Options set successfully against Volume v_puppet_test12111508.
>
This is based on a config of:
>  
>         netapp_volume_options { ''v_puppet_test12111508'':
>                 options => {''convert_ucode'' =>
''on'', ''no_atime_update'' =>
> ''on''},
>                 require =>
Netapp_volume[''v_puppet_test12111508'']
>         }
>
>
*convert_ucode* should match, and *no_atime_update* obviously didn''t...

Any ideas? 

Haven''t as yet done anything with *insync?* yet, as if I''m
honest it
slightly baffles me currently... 

Cheers
Gavin 

On Tuesday, 13 November 2012 21:57:01 UTC, Nan Liu
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 11:58 AM, fatmcgav
<fatm...@gmail.com<javascript:>
> > wrote:
>
>> Looks like overriding the ''insync?'' method is the way
to go, as I''m only
>> interested in checking/setting property values that are being passed 
>> through...
>>
>> Any insync? examples that I could refer to? 
>>
>
> There''s a simple example here:
>
>
https://github.com/puppetlabs/puppetlabs-f5/blob/master/lib/puppet/type/f5_virtualserver.rb#L13-15
>
> Search puppet source code lib/puppet/type/ for additional ones.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nan
>  
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/rKYLDjFxXJAJ.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

On Wednesday, November 14, 2012 6:04:11 AM UTC-6, Gavin Williams
wrote:
>
> Ok, I''ve just pushed the latest code to Github: 
>
https://github.com/fatmcgav/fatmcgav-netapp/commit/d5ae999fc49b1de6726e8f4b7027648cf2eb64a2
>
> I''ve managed to get the *create *functioning correctly, and
updating the
> NetApp options as required. 
>
> *exists?* has also been fleshed out a lot. 
> Logic is that it will pull back a list of the current options set against 
> the referenced volume, and then construct a hash of the returned
key=>value
> pairs. 
> The matching keys are then pulled from the current options and the setting 
> options hashes, and the values of those keys compared. 
> If they are different, then the *create *should be triggered. 
>
> This is working fine in principle. 
>
> However the current issue is that the *exists?* will *return false*whenever
a single property value doesn''t match. The create will then
> process the whole list of setting options, rather than just the mis-matched
> one(s)... 
>

Your design sounds flawed to me.  I think you''re getting tripped up by
the
difference between modelling all the options as a group (as you are doing) 
and modelling individual options.  I''m not certain that it makes sense
for *
exists?* ever to return false, for even an empty set of options is still a 
set of options.  If it never returns false then your *create* method will 
never be called, so it can be empty.

Notably missing from your code, however, is a non-trivial implementation of 
*options=*, the setter method for your main property.  Puppet will invoke 
that method at least if it finds that the target value assigned to the 
resource differs from the actual value read from the provider.  It would 
normally be in that method that your provider does the actual work of 
modifying the existing target resource (i.e. setting the options).  If you 
don''t want to re-set all the options, then this would be a good place
to
check what changed, and set only those.

 
>
> An example run gives: 
>
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::netapp_volume_options: Matched Name 
>> no_atime_update. Current value = off. New value = on
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::netapp_volume_options: 
>> no_atime_update values don''t match.
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: setting 
>> Netapp Volume options against volume v_puppet_test12111508.
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Setting = 
>> no_atime_update, Value = on
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Volume 
>> Option no_atime_update set against Volume v_puppet_test12111508.
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Setting = 
>> convert_ucode, Value = on
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Volume 
>> Option convert_ucode set against Volume v_puppet_test12111508.
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Volume 
>> Options set successfully against Volume v_puppet_test12111508.
>>
>
> This is based on a config of:
>
>>  
>>         netapp_volume_options {
''v_puppet_test12111508'':
>>                 options => {''convert_ucode'' =>
''on'', ''no_atime_update'' =>
>> ''on''},
>>                 require =>
Netapp_volume[''v_puppet_test12111508'']
>>         }
>>
>>
> *convert_ucode* should match, and *no_atime_update* obviously
didn''t...
>
> Any ideas? 
>
> Haven''t as yet done anything with *insync?* yet, as if
I''m honest it
> slightly baffles me currently... 
>

I''m not sure you need to do anything for insync?.  I think Puppet by 
default compares the actual property values (obtained from the provider via 
their getter methods) with the ones set on the resource (as parsed from the 
manifest), and considers the resource to be in sync if they all are equal.


John

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/9SBH1F9q4kIJ.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

John

Cheers for the response... Looks like I''ve got some more reading to do
to
get my head around some of the more complex stuff... 

Think you''re right in that I''m trying to treat the options as
a whole,
rather than individual items... 

Am I better off moving to a prefetch/flush style provider, rather than the 
getter/setting method? 

Cheers
Gavin 

On Wednesday, 14 November 2012 14:49:53 UTC, jcbollinger
wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, November 14, 2012 6:04:11 AM UTC-6, Gavin Williams wrote:
>>
>> Ok, I''ve just pushed the latest code to Github: 
>>
https://github.com/fatmcgav/fatmcgav-netapp/commit/d5ae999fc49b1de6726e8f4b7027648cf2eb64a2
>>
>> I''ve managed to get the *create *functioning correctly, and
updating the
>> NetApp options as required. 
>>
>> *exists?* has also been fleshed out a lot. 
>> Logic is that it will pull back a list of the current options set
against
>> the referenced volume, and then construct a hash of the returned
key=>value
>> pairs. 
>> The matching keys are then pulled from the current options and the 
>> setting options hashes, and the values of those keys compared. 
>> If they are different, then the *create *should be triggered. 
>>
>> This is working fine in principle. 
>>
>> However the current issue is that the *exists?* will *return
false*whenever a single property value doesn''t match. The create will
then
>> process the whole list of setting options, rather than just the
mis-matched
>> one(s)... 
>>
>
>
> Your design sounds flawed to me.  I think you''re getting tripped
up by the
> difference between modelling all the options as a group (as you are doing) 
> and modelling individual options.  I''m not certain that it makes
sense for
> *exists?* ever to return false, for even an empty set of options is still 
> a set of options.  If it never returns false then your *create* method 
> will never be called, so it can be empty.
>
> Notably missing from your code, however, is a non-trivial implementation 
> of *options=*, the setter method for your main property.  Puppet will 
> invoke that method at least if it finds that the target value assigned to 
> the resource differs from the actual value read from the provider.  It 
> would normally be in that method that your provider does the actual work of
> modifying the existing target resource (i.e. setting the options).  If you 
> don''t want to re-set all the options, then this would be a good
place to
> check what changed, and set only those.
>
>  
>
>>
>> An example run gives: 
>>
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::netapp_volume_options: Matched
Name
>>> no_atime_update. Current value = off. New value = on
>>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::netapp_volume_options: 
>>> no_atime_update values don''t match.
>>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options:
setting
>>> Netapp Volume options against volume v_puppet_test12111508.
>>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options:
Setting =
>>> no_atime_update, Value = on
>>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Volume
>>> Option no_atime_update set against Volume v_puppet_test12111508.
>>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options:
Setting =
>>> convert_ucode, Value = on
>>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Volume
>>> Option convert_ucode set against Volume v_puppet_test12111508.
>>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Volume
>>> Options set successfully against Volume v_puppet_test12111508.
>>>
>>
>> This is based on a config of:
>>
>>>  
>>>         netapp_volume_options {
''v_puppet_test12111508'':
>>>                 options => {''convert_ucode''
=> ''on'', ''no_atime_update''
>>> => ''on''},
>>>                 require =>
Netapp_volume[''v_puppet_test12111508'']
>>>         }
>>>
>>>
>> *convert_ucode* should match, and *no_atime_update* obviously
didn''t...
>>
>> Any ideas? 
>>
>> Haven''t as yet done anything with *insync?* yet, as if
I''m honest it
>> slightly baffles me currently... 
>>
>
>
> I''m not sure you need to do anything for insync?.  I think Puppet
by
> default compares the actual property values (obtained from the provider via
> their getter methods) with the ones set on the resource (as parsed from the
> manifest), and considers the resource to be in sync if they all are equal.
>
>
> John
>
>
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/By9h4HHOYrIJ.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 8:56 AM, Gavin Williams <fatmcgav@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Cheers for the response... Looks like I''ve got some more reading
to do to
> get my head around some of the more complex stuff...
>
I''m not sure why netapp_volume_options is a separate resource. You are
already managing the volume state in netapp_volume, and all netapp volume
options should be properties in netapp_volume instead.

Think you''re right in that I''m trying to treat the options as
a whole,
> rather than individual items...
>
The resource seems to make more sense modeled as:

netapp_volume { ''example'':
  ensure => present,
  initsize => ''2GB'',
  convert_ucode => ''on'',
  no_atime_update => ''on'',
}

The provider exists? method should simply return true if the volume is
present and it should not compare the property values (that''s what
Puppet
does for you). One key difference is volume options should be newproperty.
So far you implemented all attributes as parameters, and puppet will not
retrieve and compare parameter values (i.e. it will not call
initsize/initsize= method).

The convert_ucode method return the option value. and convert_ucode= method
updates the setting.

> Am I better off moving to a prefetch/flush style provider, rather than the
> getter/setting method?
>
I would avoid prefetch/flush until you have the provider working with
individual get/set first.

Thanks,

Nan

-- 
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.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

Nan

Cheers again for the info...

Now I think more about it, you may well be right in that it should be part
of the netapp_volume provider...

However I''m not sure that having individual params/properties for each
volume option is the right way - The list of possible volume options
currently stands at 36.. I don''t really fancy having to implement a
param/property for each of those... However I could see a single
''options''
hash param/prop working for that... Although then I''m back to the same
challenge of making sure each volume option is set & maintained
correctly...

The other challenge is that to set volume options is a different webservice
call to the volume-list/volume-create method, but I''m guessing I can
just
get that handled with another def in the provider...

Thoughts?

Cheers
Gav


On 14 November 2012 17:29, Nan Liu <nan@puppetlabs.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 8:56 AM, Gavin Williams
<fatmcgav@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Cheers for the response... Looks like I''ve got some more
reading to do to
>> get my head around some of the more complex stuff...
>>
>
> I''m not sure why netapp_volume_options is a separate resource. You
are
> already managing the volume state in netapp_volume, and all netapp volume
> options should be properties in netapp_volume instead.
>
> Think you''re right in that I''m trying to treat the
options as a whole,
>> rather than individual items...
>>
>
> The resource seems to make more sense modeled as:
>
> netapp_volume { ''example'':
>   ensure => present,
>   initsize => ''2GB'',
>   convert_ucode => ''on'',
>   no_atime_update => ''on'',
> }
>
> The provider exists? method should simply return true if the volume is
> present and it should not compare the property values (that''s what
Puppet
> does for you). One key difference is volume options should be newproperty.
> So far you implemented all attributes as parameters, and puppet will not
> retrieve and compare parameter values (i.e. it will not call
> initsize/initsize= method).
>
> The convert_ucode method return the option value. and convert_ucode>
method updates the setting.
>
>
>> Am I better off moving to a prefetch/flush style provider, rather than
>> the getter/setting method?
>>
>
> I would avoid prefetch/flush until you have the provider working with
> individual get/set first.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nan
>
> --
> 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.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> puppet-users+unsubscribe@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
"Puppet Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 9:44 AM, fatmcgav <fatmcgav@gmail.com> wrote:
> However I''m not sure that having individual params/properties for
each
> volume option is the right way - The list of possible volume options
> currently stands at 36.. I don''t really fancy having to implement
a
> param/property for each of those... However I could see a single
''options''
> hash param/prop working for that... Although then I''m back to the
same
> challenge of making sure each volume option is set & maintained
> correctly...
>
Creating 36 options is a bit of work, but they will be documented as
resource properties, and puppet takes care of some of problem of which
option needs to be updated and only call the setter for a specific option
when necessary. I suspect the option values getter/setter are very similar
so you can use define_method to reduce boilerplate code. Certainly you can
create a single property with a hash value to manage all 36 options, but in
this case the option property need to do a few extra things:

1. option method should return all 36 options in a hash.
2. insync? should return true as long the user specified subset of option
values is the same as the one returned by the previous method. It might
make sense to maintain the list of option that needs to be updated for the
setter method.
3. option= should determine which options need update and perform them.

The other challenge is that to set volume options is a different
webservice
> call to the volume-list/volume-create method, but I''m guessing I
can just
> get that handled with another def in the provider...
>
If it makes sense to have them in one resource, whether it''s one or
more
api call is just something the provider abstracts away. I wouldn''t be
concerned how many api/commands the provider uses to manage a resource.

HTH,

Nan

-- 
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.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

Ok, after a considerable amount of reading, and some expermentation, I 
think I''ve got a working netapp_volume type/provider which can handle 
setting volume options! :D

Have branched the code to play with, so it''s available here: 
https://github.com/fatmcgav/fatmcgav-netapp/tree/volume_options_testing

Overall, it seems to work quite well. When first creating volumes, it 
correctly creates the volume using *create*, and then drops into *options=*to
set the volume options, as shown in this log exert:

^[[0;32mInfo^[[0m: Applying configuration version
''1353061861''
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: 
>
/Stage[main]//Node[actint-star-nactl01]/Netapp_export[/vol/v_puppet_test1611120925/q_puppet_test1611120925]/require:
> requires Netapp_qtree[q_puppet_test1611120925]
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: 
>
/Stage[main]//Node[actint-star-nactl01]/Netapp_qtree[q_puppet_test1611120925]/require:
> requires Netapp_volume[v_puppet_test1611120925]
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Stage[main]: Skipping host resources because running 
> on a device
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Class[Main]: Skipping host resources because running 
> on a device
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Node[actint-star-nactl01]: Skipping host resources 
> because running on a device
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: checking existance of 
> Netapp Volume v_puppet_test1611120925
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: Vol Info: <results 
> errno="13040" reason="No volume named
''v_puppet_test1611120925'' exists"
> status="failed"></results>
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: Volume
doesn''t exist.
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: creating Netapp 
> Volume v_puppet_test1611120925 of initial size 10g in Aggregate aggr01 
> using space reserve of none.
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: Volume 
> v_puppet_test1611120925 created successfully. Setting options...
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: Got to options= 
> setter...
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Setting = 
> try_first, Value = volume_grow
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Volume Option 
> try_first set against Volume v_puppet_test1611120925.
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Setting = 
> no_atime_update, Value = on
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Volume Option 
> no_atime_update set against Volume v_puppet_test1611120925.
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Setting = 
> convert_ucode, Value = on
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Volume Option 
> convert_ucode set against Volume v_puppet_test1611120925.
>
/Stage[main]//Node[actint-star-nactl01]/Netapp_volume[v_puppet_test1611120925]/ensure:
> created
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: 
>
/Stage[main]//Node[actint-star-nactl01]/Netapp_volume[v_puppet_test1611120925]:
> The container Node[actint-star-nactl01] will propagate my refresh event
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Class[Settings]: Skipping host resources because 
> running on a device
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Class[Settings]: Skipping host resources because 
> running on a device
>
>
When running against a volume that already exists, I can see it dropping 
into *options*, pulling a list of the current volume options, and then 
comparing that list against the resource *:options *value. 

However I don''t think the insync is still quite right... It still
appears
to be going through the whole *:options* list, even if they all match... 
> ^[[0;32mInfo^[[0m: Applying configuration version
''1353061861''
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: 
>
/Stage[main]//Node[actint-star-nactl01]/Netapp_qtree[q_puppet_test1611120925]/require:
> requires Netapp_volume[v_puppet_test1611120925]
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: 
>
/Stage[main]//Node[actint-star-nactl01]/Netapp_export[/vol/v_puppet_test1611120925/q_puppet_test1611120925]/require:
> requires Netapp_qtree[q_puppet_test1611120925]
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Stage[main]: Skipping host resources because running 
> on a device
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Class[Main]: Skipping host resources because running 
> on a device
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Node[actint-star-nactl01]: Skipping host resources 
> because running on a device
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: checking existance of 
> Netapp Volume v_puppet_test1611120925
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: Vol Info: <results 
> status="passed">
> ...
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: Volume exists.
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: Vol Options:
<results
> status="passed">
> ...
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::netapp_volume_options: Matched Name 
> convert_ucode. Current value = on. New value = on
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::netapp_volume_options: Matched Name 
> try_first. Current value = volume_grow. New value = volume_grow
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::netapp_volume_options: Matched Name 
> no_atime_update. Current value = on. New value = on
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: Result is a hash.
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: Returning result...
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: Got to options= 
> setter...
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Setting = 
> convert_ucode, Value = on
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Volume Option 
> convert_ucode set against Volume v_puppet_test1611120925.
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Setting = 
> try_first, Value = volume_grow
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Volume Option 
> try_first set against Volume v_puppet_test1611120925.
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Setting = 
> no_atime_update, Value = on
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Volume Option 
> no_atime_update set against Volume v_puppet_test1611120925.
>
/Stage[main]//Node[actint-star-nactl01]/Netapp_volume[v_puppet_test1611120925]/options:
> options changed ''{}'' to
''[{"convert_ucode"=>"on",
> "try_first"=>"volume_grow",
"no_atime_update"=>"on"}]''
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: 
>
/Stage[main]//Node[actint-star-nactl01]/Netapp_volume[v_puppet_test1611120925]:
> The container Node[actint-star-nactl01] will propagate my refresh event
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Class[Settings]: Skipping host resources because 
> running on a device
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Class[Settings]: Skipping host resources because 
> running on a device
>
> As you can see, all 3 options match, but all 3 options are then set in *
options=*. 

Any ideas? 

Cheers
Gavin 

On Wednesday, 14 November 2012 18:08:41 UTC, Nan Liu
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 9:44 AM, fatmcgav <fatm...@gmail.com
<javascript:>
> > wrote:
>
>> However I''m not sure that having individual params/properties
for each
>> volume option is the right way - The list of possible volume options 
>> currently stands at 36.. I don''t really fancy having to
implement a
>> param/property for each of those... However I could see a single
''options''
>> hash param/prop working for that... Although then I''m back to
the same
>> challenge of making sure each volume option is set & maintained 
>> correctly... 
>>
>
> Creating 36 options is a bit of work, but they will be documented as 
> resource properties, and puppet takes care of some of problem of which 
> option needs to be updated and only call the setter for a specific option 
> when necessary. I suspect the option values getter/setter are very similar 
> so you can use define_method to reduce boilerplate code. Certainly you 
> can create a single property with a hash value to manage all 36 options, 
> but in this case the option property need to do a few extra things:
>
> 1. option method should return all 36 options in a hash.
> 2. insync? should return true as long the user specified subset of option 
> values is the same as the one returned by the previous method. It might 
> make sense to maintain the list of option that needs to be updated for the 
> setter method.
> 3. option= should determine which options need update and perform them.
>
> The other challenge is that to set volume options is a different 
>> webservice call to the volume-list/volume-create method, but
I''m guessing I
>> can just get that handled with another def in the provider... 
>>
>
> If it makes sense to have them in one resource, whether it''s one
or more
> api call is just something the provider abstracts away. I wouldn''t
be
> concerned how many api/commands the provider uses to manage a resource. 
>
> HTH,
>
> Nan
>
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/LH30IJ9IrigJ.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

Ok, think I''ve kinda answered my own question... 

Added some additional logging to *insync?*, and spotted a flaw in my *
''options''* logic. I was stripping matching values at that
level, rather
than letting *insync *take care of that. 

So tweaked the *option* as follows:

--- a/lib/puppet/provider/netapp_volume/netapp_volume.rb
> +++ b/lib/puppet/provider/netapp_volume/netapp_volume.rb
> @@ -77,7 +77,7 @@
>      result = {}
>      matched_options.each do |name|
>        Puppet.debug("Puppet::Provider::netapp_volume_options: Matched
Name
> #{name}. Current value = #{[current_options[name]]}. New value = 
> #{[set_options[name]]} \n")
> -      result[name] = current_options[name] unless current_options[name] 
> == set_options[name]
> +      result[name] = current_options[name]
>      end
>      Puppet.debug("Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: Returning result 
> hash... \n")
>      result
>
Can now see *insync? *correctly iterating through, and where they all match 
*options=* doesn''t get called :D

However still looks like if one of the *:options *doesn''t match, then
the
whole lot gets set again... I guess that''s a reasonable logic in that
if
one doesn''t match, it''s quite possible other''s
don''t match, so set them all
to be safe... Unless I missed something? 

Example run of the above is: 
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::netapp_volume_options: Matched Name 
> try_first. Current value = volume_grow. New value = snap_delete
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::netapp_volume_options: Matched Name 
> convert_ucode. Current value = on. New value = on
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::netapp_volume_options: Matched Name 
> no_atime_update. Current value = on. New value = on
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: Result is a hash.
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: Returning result...
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Checking if is.class and should.class are both 
> Hashes...
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Both is.class and should.class are Hashes...
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Comparing key values for try_first. Is = volume_grow 
> Should = snap_delete
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: Got to options= 
> setter...
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Setting = 
> try_first, Value = snap_delete
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Volume Option 
> try_first set against Volume v_puppet_test1611120925.
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Setting = 
> convert_ucode, Value = on
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Volume Option 
> convert_ucode set against Volume v_puppet_test1611120925.
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Setting = 
> no_atime_update, Value = on
> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Volume Option 
> no_atime_update set against Volume v_puppet_test1611120925.
>
/Stage[main]//Node[actint-star-nactl01]/Netapp_volume[v_puppet_test1611120925]/options:
> options changed ''{"convert_ucode"=>"on",
"try_first"=>"volume_grow",
> "no_atime_update"=>"on"}'' to
''[{"try_first"=>"snap_delete",
> "convert_ucode"=>"on",
"no_atime_update"=>"on"}]''
>
>
Comments welcome. 

Cheers
Gavin  
*
*On Friday, 16 November 2012 11:23:41 UTC, Gavin Williams
wrote:
>
> Ok, after a considerable amount of reading, and some expermentation, I 
> think I''ve got a working netapp_volume type/provider which can
handle
> setting volume options! :D
>
> Have branched the code to play with, so it''s available here: 
> https://github.com/fatmcgav/fatmcgav-netapp/tree/volume_options_testing
>
> Overall, it seems to work quite well. When first creating volumes, it 
> correctly creates the volume using *create*, and then drops into
*options> * to set the volume options, as shown in this log exert:
>
> ^[[0;32mInfo^[[0m: Applying configuration version
''1353061861''
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: 
>>
/Stage[main]//Node[actint-star-nactl01]/Netapp_export[/vol/v_puppet_test1611120925/q_puppet_test1611120925]/require:
>> requires Netapp_qtree[q_puppet_test1611120925]
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: 
>>
/Stage[main]//Node[actint-star-nactl01]/Netapp_qtree[q_puppet_test1611120925]/require:
>> requires Netapp_volume[v_puppet_test1611120925]
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Stage[main]: Skipping host resources because
running
>> on a device
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Class[Main]: Skipping host resources because
running
>> on a device
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Node[actint-star-nactl01]: Skipping host resources 
>> because running on a device
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: checking existance
>> of Netapp Volume v_puppet_test1611120925
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: Vol Info:
<results
>> errno="13040" reason="No volume named
''v_puppet_test1611120925'' exists"
>> status="failed"></results>
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: Volume
doesn''t exist.
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: creating Netapp 
>> Volume v_puppet_test1611120925 of initial size 10g in Aggregate aggr01 
>> using space reserve of none.
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: Volume 
>> v_puppet_test1611120925 created successfully. Setting options...
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: Got to options= 
>> setter...
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Setting = 
>> try_first, Value = volume_grow
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Volume 
>> Option try_first set against Volume v_puppet_test1611120925.
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Setting = 
>> no_atime_update, Value = on
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Volume 
>> Option no_atime_update set against Volume v_puppet_test1611120925.
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Setting = 
>> convert_ucode, Value = on
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Volume 
>> Option convert_ucode set against Volume v_puppet_test1611120925.
>>
/Stage[main]//Node[actint-star-nactl01]/Netapp_volume[v_puppet_test1611120925]/ensure:
>> created
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: 
>>
/Stage[main]//Node[actint-star-nactl01]/Netapp_volume[v_puppet_test1611120925]:
>> The container Node[actint-star-nactl01] will propagate my refresh event
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Class[Settings]: Skipping host resources because 
>> running on a device
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Class[Settings]: Skipping host resources because 
>> running on a device
>>
>>
> When running against a volume that already exists, I can see it dropping 
> into *options*, pulling a list of the current volume options, and then 
> comparing that list against the resource *:options *value. 
>
> However I don''t think the insync is still quite right... It still
appears
> to be going through the whole *:options* list, even if they all match... 
>
>> ^[[0;32mInfo^[[0m: Applying configuration version
''1353061861''
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: 
>>
/Stage[main]//Node[actint-star-nactl01]/Netapp_qtree[q_puppet_test1611120925]/require:
>> requires Netapp_volume[v_puppet_test1611120925]
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: 
>>
/Stage[main]//Node[actint-star-nactl01]/Netapp_export[/vol/v_puppet_test1611120925/q_puppet_test1611120925]/require:
>> requires Netapp_qtree[q_puppet_test1611120925]
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Stage[main]: Skipping host resources because
running
>> on a device
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Class[Main]: Skipping host resources because
running
>> on a device
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Node[actint-star-nactl01]: Skipping host resources 
>> because running on a device
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: checking existance
>> of Netapp Volume v_puppet_test1611120925
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: Vol Info:
<results
>> status="passed">
>> ...
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: Volume exists.
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: Vol Options: 
>> <results status="passed">
>> ...
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::netapp_volume_options: Matched
Name
>> convert_ucode. Current value = on. New value = on
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::netapp_volume_options: Matched
Name
>> try_first. Current value = volume_grow. New value = volume_grow
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::netapp_volume_options: Matched
Name
>> no_atime_update. Current value = on. New value = on
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: Result is a hash.
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: Returning
result...
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume: Got to options= 
>> setter...
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Setting = 
>> convert_ucode, Value = on
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Volume 
>> Option convert_ucode set against Volume v_puppet_test1611120925.
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Setting = 
>> try_first, Value = volume_grow
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Volume 
>> Option try_first set against Volume v_puppet_test1611120925.
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Setting = 
>> no_atime_update, Value = on
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Puppet::Provider::Netapp_volume_options: Volume 
>> Option no_atime_update set against Volume v_puppet_test1611120925.
>>
/Stage[main]//Node[actint-star-nactl01]/Netapp_volume[v_puppet_test1611120925]/options:
>> options changed ''{}'' to
''[{"convert_ucode"=>"on",
>> "try_first"=>"volume_grow",
"no_atime_update"=>"on"}]''
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: 
>>
/Stage[main]//Node[actint-star-nactl01]/Netapp_volume[v_puppet_test1611120925]:
>> The container Node[actint-star-nactl01] will propagate my refresh event
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Class[Settings]: Skipping host resources because 
>> running on a device
>> ^[[0;36mDebug^[[0m: Class[Settings]: Skipping host resources because 
>> running on a device
>>
>> As you can see, all 3 options match, but all 3 options are then set in
*
> options=*. 
>
> Any ideas? 
>
> Cheers
> Gavin 
>
> On Wednesday, 14 November 2012 18:08:41 UTC, Nan Liu wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 9:44 AM, fatmcgav <fatm...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>
>>> However I''m not sure that having individual
params/properties for each
>>> volume option is the right way - The list of possible volume
options
>>> currently stands at 36.. I don''t really fancy having to
implement a
>>> param/property for each of those... However I could see a single
''options''
>>> hash param/prop working for that... Although then I''m back
to the same
>>> challenge of making sure each volume option is set & maintained
>>> correctly... 
>>>
>>
>> Creating 36 options is a bit of work, but they will be documented as 
>> resource properties, and puppet takes care of some of problem of which 
>> option needs to be updated and only call the setter for a specific
option
>> when necessary. I suspect the option values getter/setter are very
similar
>> so you can use define_method to reduce boilerplate code. Certainly you 
>> can create a single property with a hash value to manage all 36
options,
>> but in this case the option property need to do a few extra things:
>>
>> 1. option method should return all 36 options in a hash.
>> 2. insync? should return true as long the user specified subset of
option
>> values is the same as the one returned by the previous method. It might
>> make sense to maintain the list of option that needs to be updated for
the
>> setter method.
>> 3. option= should determine which options need update and perform them.
>>
>> The other challenge is that to set volume options is a different 
>>> webservice call to the volume-list/volume-create method, but
I''m guessing I
>>> can just get that handled with another def in the provider... 
>>>
>>
>> If it makes sense to have them in one resource, whether it''s
one or more
>> api call is just something the provider abstracts away. I
wouldn''t be
>> concerned how many api/commands the provider uses to manage a resource.
>>
>> HTH,
>>
>> Nan
>>
>
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/VrrAotSP0IQJ.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

On 11/13/2012 08:19 PM, Gavin Williams wrote:
> After a quick google, came up with:
> 
>     #!/usr/bin/env ruby
> 
>     grades = { "Bob" => 82,
>                "Jim" => 94,
>                "Billy" => 58
>              }
> 
>     grades.each do|name,grade|
>       puts "#{name}: #{grade}"
>     end
> 
> 
> So now all I need to do is pull the existing options values and compile
> a hash to compare in the exists?, and use the above in the create...
> 
> Quick question on the create - how will it handle one property that
> matches, but one property that doesn''t?
I''ve done a similar mangling (from/to hashes) in my Cobbler module, I
could send it to you so you can learn by example, if you''re interested.

But to answer your main point - if the sorted hashes aren''t the same,
provider will try to change the state to the new hash.

-- 
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.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

On Friday, November 16, 2012 5:44:09 AM UTC-6, Gavin Williams
wrote:
>
> However still looks like if one of the *:options *doesn''t match,
then the
> whole lot gets set again... I guess that''s a reasonable logic in
that if
> one doesn''t match, it''s quite possible other''s
don''t match, so set them all
> to be safe... Unless I missed something? 
>
>
What you continue to miss is that you are treating all the options as a 
single property.  That''s ok, but it means that at the level of the
resource
/ provider interface, Puppet cannot set individual options, only all of 
them as a group.  You can''t have it both ways.

Inside your provider, however, you can implement the interface to the 
underlying tool any way you want.  In particular, in your options= 
function, you can look at the current value and the value being set, 
extract the changes, and apply only those.  I guess you were trying to do 
something like that in your insync? function, but if you''re doing
something
like that then options= is probably where it should go.


John

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/uFOu3gp_0kQJ.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

John

Cheers again, that could be a good alternative way of doing it... Use
insync? just to trigger options=, and then work out what actually needs
setting there...

Cheers
Gav
On Nov 26, 2012 5:42 PM, "jcbollinger"
<John.Bollinger@stjude.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Friday, November 16, 2012 5:44:09 AM UTC-6, Gavin Williams wrote:
>>
>> However still looks like if one of the *:options *doesn''t
match, then
>> the whole lot gets set again... I guess that''s a reasonable
logic in that
>> if one doesn''t match, it''s quite possible
other''s don''t match, so set them
>> all to be safe... Unless I missed something?
>>
>>
> What you continue to miss is that you are treating all the options as a
> single property.  That''s ok, but it means that at the level of the
resource
> / provider interface, Puppet cannot set individual options, only all of
> them as a group.  You can''t have it both ways.
>
> Inside your provider, however, you can implement the interface to the
> underlying tool any way you want.  In particular, in your options>
function, you can look at the current value and the value being set,
> extract the changes, and apply only those.  I guess you were trying to do
> something like that in your insync? function, but if you''re doing
something
> like that then options= is probably where it should go.
>
>
> John
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Puppet Users" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/uFOu3gp_0kQJ.
> To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> puppet-users+unsubscribe@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
"Puppet Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

On Monday, November 26, 2012 12:19:09 PM UTC-6, Gavin Williams
wrote:
>
> John
>
> Cheers again, that could be a good alternative way of doing it... Use 
> insync? just to trigger options=, and then work out what actually needs 
> setting there... 
>
That''s not just a good alternative, it''s the right way to do
it.  The job
of insync? is simply to determine whether all of the resource''s
properties
have the expected target values.  No more, no less.  The job of property 
setter methods such as options= is to update the underlying resource(*) so 
that the affected property has the assigned value.  It is there, at the 
interface between Puppet and the system, that you have flexibility.

(*) The property setters of providers that implement flush() work a bit 
differently, but I don''t think that''s relevant here.  I
mention it for
completeness.


John

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/OEk9ZWDBvWUJ.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

John,

Again, very helpful...
My knowledge of puppet is growing every day thanks to posts like this :-)

Cheers
Gavin
On Nov 26, 2012 7:30 PM, "jcbollinger"
<John.Bollinger@stjude.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Monday, November 26, 2012 12:19:09 PM UTC-6, Gavin Williams wrote:
>>
>> John
>>
>> Cheers again, that could be a good alternative way of doing it... Use
>> insync? just to trigger options=, and then work out what actually needs
>> setting there...
>>
>
> That''s not just a good alternative, it''s the right way to
do it.  The job
> of insync? is simply to determine whether all of the resource''s
properties
> have the expected target values.  No more, no less.  The job of property
> setter methods such as options= is to update the underlying resource(*) so
> that the affected property has the assigned value.  It is there, at the
> interface between Puppet and the system, that you have flexibility.
>
> (*) The property setters of providers that implement flush() work a bit
> differently, but I don''t think that''s relevant here.  I
mention it for
> completeness.
>
>
> John
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Puppet Users" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/OEk9ZWDBvWUJ.
> To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> puppet-users+unsubscribe@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
"Puppet Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

Firstly, sorry for bringing this thread back - However I thought it 
probably best as it''s got all the history of what I was working towards
etc... 

Anyways, onto the problem at hand. 
I''ve created a new property against my netapp_volume provider called *
:snapschedule*. 
This property is taking a hash, and doing something very similar to the
*:options
*property above... 

Code was committed under: 
https://github.com/fatmcgav/fatmcgav-netapp/commit/6427581c546f2ccb5ebf2f19826afad38b424b9d

However it looks like something isnt quite right with the insync? def, as 
I''m seeing the following in puppet device run logs:
Info: starting applying configuration to actint-star-nactl01 at 
actint-star-nactl01
Warning: Local environment: "production" doesn''t match server
specified
node environment "test", switching agent to "test".
Info: Retrieving plugin
Info: Caching catalog for actint-star-nactl01
Info: Applying configuration version ''1357295208''
Processing Volume puppet_db02_oractrl
/Stage[main]/Act::Storage::Netapp/Act::Util::Netapp::Volume[puppet_db02_oractrl]/Netapp_notify[volume_define_puppet_db02_oractrl]/message:
defined ''message'' as ''Processing Volume
puppet_db02_oractrl''
/Stage[main]/Act::Storage::Netapp/Act::Util::Netapp::Volume[puppet_db02_oractrl]/Netapp_volume[v_puppet_db02_oractrl]/snapschedule:
snapschedule changed ''{"days"=>0, "hours"=>0,
"weeks"=>0, "minutes"=>0}'' to
''[{"hours"=>"0",
"days"=>"0", "minutes"=>"0",
"weeks"=>"0"}]''
Processing Volume puppet_db02_oraarch
/Stage[main]/Act::Storage::Netapp/Act::Util::Netapp::Volume[puppet_db02_oraarch]/Netapp_notify[volume_define_puppet_db02_oraarch]/message:
defined ''message'' as ''Processing Volume
puppet_db02_oraarch''
Processing Volume puppet_db02_data
/Stage[main]/Act::Storage::Netapp/Act::Util::Netapp::Volume[puppet_db02_data]/Netapp_notify[volume_define_puppet_db02_data]/message:
defined ''message'' as ''Processing Volume
puppet_db02_data''
/Stage[main]/Act::Storage::Netapp/Act::Util::Netapp::Volume[puppet_db02_data]/Netapp_volume[v_puppet_db02_data]/snapschedule:
snapschedule changed ''{"days"=>0, "hours"=>0,
"weeks"=>0, "minutes"=>0}'' to
''[{"hours"=>"0",
"days"=>"0", "minutes"=>"0",
"weeks"=>"0"}]''

As you can see, the hash contents are identical... However the
''*to*'' hash
is wrapped in an array... 

Any ideas where I could be going wrong?

Cheers
Gavin 

On Monday, 26 November 2012 22:04:18 UTC, Gavin Williams
wrote:
>
> John, 
>
> Again, very helpful... 
> My knowledge of puppet is growing every day thanks to posts like this :-) 
>
> Cheers 
> Gavin 
> On Nov 26, 2012 7:30 PM, "jcbollinger"
<John.Bollinger@stjude.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Monday, November 26, 2012 12:19:09 PM UTC-6, Gavin Williams wrote:
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>> Cheers again, that could be a good alternative way of doing it...
Use
>>> insync? just to trigger options=, and then work out what actually
needs
>>> setting there... 
>>>
>>
>> That''s not just a good alternative, it''s the right
way to do it.  The job
>> of insync? is simply to determine whether all of the
resource''s properties
>> have the expected target values.  No more, no less.  The job of
property
>> setter methods such as options= is to update the underlying resource(*)
so
>> that the affected property has the assigned value.  It is there, at the
>> interface between Puppet and the system, that you have flexibility.
>>
>> (*) The property setters of providers that implement flush() work a bit
>> differently, but I don''t think that''s relevant here. 
I mention it for
>> completeness.
>>
>>
>> John
>>
>>  -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups
>> "Puppet Users" group.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/OEk9ZWDBvWUJ.
>> To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
>> puppet-users+unsubscribe@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
"Puppet Users" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/DWXnKlb2V28J.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.