does anyone know if a variable can be passed from a puppet class to a .yaml file?
class my_module::my_class () {
$current_date = '2021-10-12';
}
The objective would be to be able to obtain the value of the variable in a .yaml file
my_module::my_class::date_from_class:
I don't know if this is possible in any way.
Thanks in advance
It is possible to interpolate the value of a class variable into your Hiera data:
my_module::my_class::date_from_class: %{my_module::my_class::current_date}
But it is usually unwise to do so because class variables do not receive their values until and unless the class is evaluated. Class evaluation order is difficult to predict, and may change as the manifest set or class parameter values change.
If another class wants the value in question then it can just access the class variable directly. Although that's subject to the same caveat, at least another class has the power to ensure that the variable's host class gets evaluated before the variable is accessed:
class my_module::another_class {
include my_module::my_class
$the_date = $my_module::my_class::current_date
}
Related
Let's say I have a class with variables that I have initialized just after the declarations in the Class scope.
Is there a shortcut or plugin to generate a constructor that sets all the values to their initial initializations or original values set in the class scope, without manually entering them?
I realize that just reinitializing the class should do it, but I need a method for a specific use case.
I am aware that a variable can be dynamically typed with the def keyword in Groovy. But I have also noticed that in some circumstances it can be left out, such as when defining method parameters, eg func(p1, p2) instead of func(def p1, def p2). The latter form is discouraged.
I have noticed that this is extendable to all code - anytime you want to define a variable and set its value, eg var = 2 the def keyword can be safely left out. It only appears to be required if not instantiating the variable on creation, ie. def var1 so that it can be instantiated as a NullObject.
Is this the only time def is useful? Can it be safely left out in all other declarations, for example, of classes and methods?
Short answer: you can't. There are some use cases where skipping the type declaration (or def keyword) works, but it is not a general rule. For instance, Groovy scripts allow you to use variables without specific type declaration, e.g.
x = 10
However, it works because groovy.lang.Script class implements getProperty and setProperty methods that get triggered when you access a missing property. In this case, such a variable is promoted to be a global binding, not a local variable. If you try to do the same on any other class that does not implement those methods, you will end up getting groovy.lang.MissingPropertyException.
Skipping types in a method declaration is supported, both in dynamically compiled and statically compiled Groovy. But is it useful? It depends. In most cases, it's much better to declare the type for a better readability and documentation purpose. I would not recommend doing it in the public API - the user of your API will see Object type, while you may expect some specific type. It shows that this may work if your intention is to receive any object, no matter what is its specific type. (E.g. a method like dump(obj) could work like that.)
And last but not least, there is a way to skip type declaration in any context. You can use a final keyword for that.
class Foo {
final id = 1
void bar(final name) {
final greet = "Hello, "
println greet + name + "!"
}
}
This way you can get a code that compiles with dynamic compilation, as well as with static compilation enabled. Of course, using final keyword prevents you from re-assigning the variable, but for the compiler, this is enough information to infer the proper type.
For more information, you can check a similar question that was asked on SO some time ago: Groovy: "def" keyword vs concrete type
in Groovy it plays an important role in Global and Local variable
if the variable name is same with and without def
def is considered local and without def its global
I have explained here in detail https://stackoverflow.com/a/45994227/2986279
So if someone use with and without it will make a difference and can change things.
I have a module "base" with an init.pp class which has some parameters as such:
class base (
$listen_ip = "xx.xx.xx.xx",
$listen_port = 3306,
$admin_username = 'admin',
$admin_password = 'admin',
)
{
...
}
Then I have created a profile "base" where I want to set some of the parameters:
class profile::base {
class { 'base':
$listen_ip = "xxx.xxx.xx.xx",
$listen_port => 6033,
}
}
Then the is a secondary profile where I want to set the username and password:
class profile::department::sales::base {
class { '::profile::base':
$admin_username = "some_user",
$admin_password => "some_pw",
}
}
However it's not possible to set the parameters from the "sales" profile.
The idea is that some values will be always the same for the base class and that some differ based on the department.
However it's not possible to set the parameters from the "sales" profile.
Not exactly. What is not allowed is using two different resource-like declarations for the same class while building one manifest. If you use even one then you must make certain that it is the first (or only) declaration of that class that the catalog builder evaluates.
To understand this, you need to appreciate that assigning parameter values is not the principal purpose of declarations such you are using. The principal purpose is rather to specify that the class in question should be included in the catalog in the first place. In service to that goal, values are bound to all the parameters of a class at the point where its first declaration is evaluated. Thus, your two class declarations do not supplement each other. Instead, they conflict with each other.
Even if the parameter values it specified for class base were identical to those declared by class profile::base, however, Puppet would still object to all uses of class profile::department::sales::base. To simplify evaluation and be absolutely certain to avoid inconsistency, it implements a stronger constraint than is actually required: that only the first-evaluated declaration of any given class may be a resource-like one.
Note: the latest docs actually specify an even stronger constraint than that: "Resource-like class declarations require that you declare a given class only once." In practice, however, this is a simplification (in every version of Puppet so far released since the introduction of parameterized classes). It is likely inspired by the fact that the order in which Puppet manifests are evaluated can be difficult to predict, so if you use include-like declarations along with a resource-like declaration of the same class, in different manifests, then it can be hard to ensure that the resource-like one is always evaluated first.
The idea is that some values will be always the same for the base
class and that some differ based on the department.
For most purposes it is best to avoid resource-like class declarations altogether, relying instead on external data (Hiera) for binding values to class parameters. Hiera recognizes a hierarchy of data sources (hence the name) and supports specifying different parameters at different levels, and even overriding data from one level at a higher-priority level.
My suggestion, then, is to leverage Hiera to assign appropriate parameter values to class base. There are many ways the specifics could play out.
In the scope of one class, I need to be able to access a variable from another class. The variable is passed as a parameter, e.g.
class parameterized_class (
$param1,
) {
...
}
and
class other_class () {
include parameterized_class
Class['parameterized_class'] -> Class['other_class']
$local_var = $parameterized_class::param1
}
With an example usage of:
node default {
class { 'parameterized_class':
param1 => 'somevalue',
}
class { 'other_class': }
}
The above example does not work, as I get an error that looks roughly like:
Must pass param1 to
Class[Parameterized_class] at
/path/to/modules/parameterized_class/manifests/init.pp:1
on node localhost
Obviously, include is trying to declare parameterized_class without passing any parameters. But from the docs, I can see that include allows for a class to have been already previously declared, and since I have the parameterized_class declaration as a dependency of other_class, I don't understand how I could be getting this error.
I'm using Puppet 3.4.3, the version available on Ubuntu 14.04 Trusty
How should I go about retrieving the value of the $param1 in parameterized_class from within other_class's scope? Is it not possible to use include on parameterized classes?
According to the Puppet documentation (https://docs.puppet.com/puppet/3.5/lang_classes.html#include-like-behavior) you cannot use include-like declarations with mandatory parameters. In your case, what you can do is just not bother with the include since you've already handled that by declaring it in your node definition. Also, because both are declared in your node definition you would want to order them there as well.
As a side note not providing default values is a bad practice as is using variables across modules.
I am using https://github.com/openstack/puppet-keystone to set up an OpenStack management/controller node. I need to add the 'glance' user to keystone. I want to try and do as much as I can in my hiera data so my manifest will be simple.
Here is my manifest:
class kilo2_keystone {
include controller_ceph
include keystone
include keystone::config
include keystone::user
# keystone_user { 'glance':
# ensure => present,
# }
}
The commented out section works, but I want to be able to do include keystone::user and supply the parameters in my hiera data like so:
keystone::user:
"%{hiera('glance_admin_user')}":
ensure: present
But when I run puppet agent -t on my node I get this error:
Could not find class ::keystone::user
The commented-out code declares a resource of type keystone_user, not a class. Presumably its type, keystone_user, is provided by the puppet-keystone module. The include() family of functions are for declaring classes, not resources, so they are inapplicable to keystone_user.
There is more than one way you could proceed. If you don't anticipate wanting to anything more complicated than declaring one or more keystone_users present, then I'd recommend giving your class a parameter for the user name(s), to which you can assign a value via Hiera:
class kilo2_keystone($usernames = []) {
include controller_ceph
include keystone
include keystone::config
keystone_user { $usernames:
ensure => present,
}
}
On the other hand, if you want to be able to declare multiple users, each with its own set of attributes, then the create_resources() function is probably the path of least resistance. You still want to parameterize your class so that it gets the data from Hiera via automated data binding, but now you want the data to be structured differently, as described in the create_resources() docs: as a hash mapping resource titles (usernames, in your case) to inner hashes of resource parameters to corresponding values.
For example, your class might look like this:
class kilo2_keystone($userdata = {}) {
include controller_ceph
include keystone
include keystone::config
create_resources('keystone_user', $userdata)
}
The corresponding data for this class might look like this:
kilo2_keystone::userdata:
glance:
ensure: present
enabled: true
another_user:
ensure: absent
Note also that you are placing your kilo2_keystone class in the top scope. You really ought to put it in a module and assign it to that module's namespace. The latter would look like this:
class mymodule::kilo2_keystone($userdata = {}) {
# ...
}