Actions
Bug #11963
closedPlease, legitimate "Priority" usage in multi-instance directives
Pull Request:
Severity:
Minor - inconvenience | misleading | easy workaround
UX impact:
User visibility:
Operational - other Techniques | Technique editor | Rudder settings
Effort required:
Priority:
32
Name check:
Fix check:
Regression:
Description
Please note, that https://www.rudder-project.org/doc-4.2/_directives_ordering.html is in fact incomplete.
https://www.mauras.ch/rudder-fun-with-variables.html
is exploiting undocumented fact that "Priority" field takes precedence over alpha-numeric naming order.
It's really useful together with generic_variable_definition, allowing us to make multilevel overriding (like Chef does).
It works because vars in generic_variable_definition are just internal objects, and redeclaration is ok in cfengine.
Example:
bundle common generic_variable_definition { vars: "SECURITY_ACCESS_CONF" string => "admins", policy => "overridable"; … "SECURITY_ACCESS_CONF" string => "admins,etc", policy => "overridable"; …
will set generic_variable_definition.SECURITY_ACCESS_CONF = "admins,etc".
Just use another directive with higher "Priority" (0>1>…>10). And last one will be used.
- M.b. it works with other directives, but (in general) is useless in management of external objects.
Per contra, it's very useful to override internal declarations, providing scalar priority instead of 2-level name-sorting hell.
It's also a good workaround against single-level group hierarchy.
Actions