Interest in Key/Value LWRP

[dpetzel]

I was thinking about adding an LWRP (consul_kv) to allow for idempotent puts and deletes into the KV store. Before I go down that path is there enough interest to warrant it/would a PR get accepted?

Thanks

[johnbellone]

I have nothing against it. If you find it useful I imagine other people will as well!

[lyrixx]

I think I could be a good idea for deployment date, or chef run information. But don't you violate consul by doing that for other values? I mean, I could find it weird to use chef to set some value into the KV store. What kind of value do you want to store?

[dpetzel]

@lyrixx In what way would this violate consul? I'm not aware of any real guidelines around the type of data, or mechanism for putting it in there. If there are some guidelines, I'd love to not so as not to deviate from them.

Deployment data is one option, but configuration data is another. One use case I am currently looking at is populating configuration for the consul-alerts project.

[lyrixx]

Actually, I'm a novice with consul. I (could) be wrong when I'm talking about it ;) So don't really take my comment into account. I just think it's weird to populate consul KV with chef. But actually, I totally make sens ;)

[dpetzel]

I think we are all novices! I know I am, which is why I'm certainly interested in what others think.

[dpetzel]

In the interest of keeping things simple I opted to put this into its own cookbook

[lock]

This thread has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.