Difference between revisions of "Hiera Example"
From stoney cloud
(explain a bit what this is) |
|||
(2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
- "ou=virtual machines,ou=services?sub?(&(sstNetworkHostName=%{::hostname})(sstNetworkDomainName=%{::domainname}))" | - "ou=virtual machines,ou=services?sub?(&(sstNetworkHostName=%{::hostname})(sstNetworkDomainName=%{::domainname}))" | ||
- "ou=software stack,ou=configuration?sub?(uid=%{::rzUid})" | - "ou=software stack,ou=configuration?sub?(uid=%{::rzUid})" | ||
+ | - "%{::clientcert}" | ||
+ | - "%{::custom_location}" | ||
+ | - common | ||
+ | </pre> | ||
+ | |||
+ | <pre> | ||
+ | --- | ||
+ | :backends: | ||
+ | - json | ||
+ | :json: | ||
+ | :datadir: /etc/puppet/hieradata | ||
+ | :hierarchy: | ||
- "%{::clientcert}" | - "%{::clientcert}" | ||
- "%{::custom_location}" | - "%{::custom_location}" | ||
Line 26: | Line 38: | ||
* This is an example of how a hiera config file might look with an mock ldap backend. The backend in question still needs to be found or written. | * This is an example of how a hiera config file might look with an mock ldap backend. The backend in question still needs to be found or written. | ||
* mapping from a DN to directory structure would be nice, so we would rather have to write: ''ou=virtual machines/ou=services'' instead to be compatible with the already existing yaml/json backends or something different entirely | * mapping from a DN to directory structure would be nice, so we would rather have to write: ''ou=virtual machines/ou=services'' instead to be compatible with the already existing yaml/json backends or something different entirely | ||
+ | * this needs to take into consideration that puppet expects keys to be defined in a way to enable implicit parameter injection in parameterized classes | ||
+ | * existing ldap backends for hiera: [https://github.com/hunner/hiera-ldap], [http://forge.ircam.fr/p/hiera-ldap-backend/] | ||
+ | * we should probably aim at integrating this in hiera-2 with regards to ARM-8 and the already imlemented ARM-9 | ||
+ | * I'm not convinced that we should not just grab all this data from the [[stoney_core:_REST_API]] and use that as an integration point for puppet. | ||
[[Category: Documentation]] | [[Category: Documentation]] |
Latest revision as of 15:33, 28 March 2014
--- :backends: - ldap - yaml - json :ldap: :url:ldaps://ldap.stoney-cloud.org:636/ :binddn:cn=Manager,dc=stoney-cloud,dc=org :bindpw:secret :basedn:dc=stoney-cloud,dc=org :yaml: :datadir: /etc/puppet/hieradata :json: :datadir: /etc/puppet/hieradata :hierarchy: - "ou=virtual machines,ou=services?sub?(&(sstNetworkHostName=%{::hostname})(sstNetworkDomainName=%{::domainname}))" - "ou=software stack,ou=configuration?sub?(uid=%{::rzUid})" - "%{::clientcert}" - "%{::custom_location}" - common
--- :backends: - json :json: :datadir: /etc/puppet/hieradata :hierarchy: - "%{::clientcert}" - "%{::custom_location}" - common
Notes:
- This is an example of how a hiera config file might look with an mock ldap backend. The backend in question still needs to be found or written.
- mapping from a DN to directory structure would be nice, so we would rather have to write: ou=virtual machines/ou=services instead to be compatible with the already existing yaml/json backends or something different entirely
- this needs to take into consideration that puppet expects keys to be defined in a way to enable implicit parameter injection in parameterized classes
- existing ldap backends for hiera: [1], [2]
- we should probably aim at integrating this in hiera-2 with regards to ARM-8 and the already imlemented ARM-9
- I'm not convinced that we should not just grab all this data from the stoney_core:_REST_API and use that as an integration point for puppet.