Skip to content

add 'state_output_profile' option for profile output#19320

Merged
thatch45 merged 3 commits into
saltstack:developfrom
clan:opt_profile
Jan 2, 2015
Merged

add 'state_output_profile' option for profile output#19320
thatch45 merged 3 commits into
saltstack:developfrom
clan:opt_profile

Conversation

@clan

@clan clan commented Jan 2, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

We use "pdsh -l root -g group salt-call state.sls service.xxxx test=True| dshbak -c" to check whether the change is expected and identical for many hosts before actually apply them. With the profile information is shown, the diff infomation from different hosts can't be merged (by dshbak -c) because of the start time and duration. This patch add an option 'state_output_profile', so we can turn off the started and duration info.

Comment thread conf/minion Outdated

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

statei should be state

@thatch45

thatch45 commented Jan 2, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I am wondering if this change could help you:

pdsh -l root -g group salt-call state.sls service.xxxx test=True --out json | dshbak -c

Otherwise I am happy to merge this in given the commented lines are fixed :)

@clan

clan commented Jan 2, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

ok, fixed as advised in the comment.

The readability of json output is worse than text output, so I prefer this options to be included, thanks!

thatch45 added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 2, 2015
add 'state_output_profile' option for profile output
@thatch45 thatch45 merged commit e2dd4b9 into saltstack:develop Jan 2, 2015
@thatch45

thatch45 commented Jan 2, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thanks @clan ! I considered that after posting it, thanks for the changes!

@clan clan deleted the opt_profile branch January 2, 2015 17:44
@clan

clan commented May 27, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

why this pull request not merged to 2015.5 branch? thanks

@rallytime

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Hi @clan - So our workflow is to merge branches "forward". So, for example, a release branch such as 2014.7 or 2015.5 is merged forward into newer branches like develop. (2014.7 --> 2015.5, and then 2015.5 --> develop.) If a fix belongs in a release branch, rather than develop, then the fix should be applied directly to that branch, and then it will merge forward and propagate to all "newer" branches.

If a fix was originally made against a "newer" branch such as develop, but it should be in an older branch like 2015.5, then we'll need to backport it. We try to determine if fixes should be backported when they're submitted, but sometimes we miss some. I can look at backporting this fix right now.

In the future, best practice is to make the fix against the release branch that the bug occurs on and then we'll merge it forward. You can read more about that here, if you like.

@rallytime rallytime added the bugfix-bckport will be be back-ported to an older release branch by creating a PR against that branch label May 27, 2015
@rallytime rallytime added Bugfix - [Done] back-ported and removed bugfix-bckport will be be back-ported to an older release branch by creating a PR against that branch labels May 27, 2015
jfindlay added a commit that referenced this pull request May 28, 2015
@clan

clan commented May 29, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

got it, thanks!

@rallytime

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Sure thing! :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants