There’s a New Player in Town, named Habitat

You may have heard some buzz around the launch of Chef‘s new open source project Habitat (still in beta), designed to change a bit of how we think about building and delivering software applications in the modern age.

There’s a lot of press, video announcement, and even a Food Fight Show where we got to chat with some of the brains behind the framework, and get into some of the nitty-gritty details.

In the vibrant Slack channel where a lot of the fast-paced discussion happens with a bunch of the core habitat developers, a community member had brought up a pain point, as many do.
They were trying to build a Python application, and had to result to playing pretty hard with either the PYTHONPATH variable or with sys.path post-dependency install.
One even used Virtualenv inside the isolated environment.

I had worked on making an LLVM compiler package, and while notoriously slow to compile on my laptop, I used the waiting time to get a Python web application working.

My setup is OSX 10.11.5, with Docker (native) 1.12.0-rc2 (almost out of beta!).

I decided to use the Flask web framework to carry out a Hello World, as it would prove a few of pieces:

  • Using Python to install dependencies using pip
  • Adding “local” code into a package
  • Importing the Python package in the app code
  • Executing the custom binary that the Flask package installs

Key element: it needed to be as simple as possible, but no simpler.

On my main machine, I wrote my application.
It listens on port 5000, and responds with a simple phrase.
Yay, I wrote a website.

Then I set about to packaging it into a deliverable where, in habitat’s nomenclature, it becomes a self-contained package, which can then be run via the habitat supervisor.

This all starts with getting the habitat executable, conveniently named hab.
A recent addition to the Homebrew Casks family, installing habitat was as simple as:

$ brew cask install hab

habitat version 0.7.0 is in use during the authoring of this article.

I sat down, wrote a plan.sh file, that describes how to put the pieces together.

There’s a bunch of phases in the build cycle that are fully customizable, or “stub-able” if you don’t want them to take the default action.
Some details were garnered from here, despite my package not being a binary.

Once I got my package built, it was a matter of figuring out how to run it, and one of the default modes is to export the entire thing as a Docker image, so I set about to run that, to get a feel for the iterative development cycle of making the application work as configured within the habitat universe.

(This step usually isn’t the best one for regular application development, but it is good for figuring out what needs to be configured and how.)

# In first OSX shell
$ hab studio enter
[1][default:/src:0]# build
...
   python-hello: Build time: 0m36s
[2][default:/src:0]# hab pkg export docker miketheman/python-hello
...
Successfully built 2d2740a182fb
[3][default:/src:0]#

# In another OSX shell:
$ docker run -it -p 5000:5000 -p 9631:9631 miketheman/python-hello
hab-sup(MN): Starting miketheman/python-hello
hab-sup(GS): Supervisor 172.17.0.3: cb719c1e-0cac-432a-8d86-afb676c3cf7f
hab-sup(GS): Census python-hello.default: 19b7533a-66ba-4c6f-b6b7-c011abd7dbe1
hab-sup(GS): Starting inbound gossip listener
hab-sup(GS): Starting outbound gossip distributor
hab-sup(GS): Starting gossip failure detector
hab-sup(CN): Starting census health adjuster
python-hello(SV): Starting
python-hello(O):  * Running on http://0.0.0.0:5000/ (Press CTRL+C to quit)

# In a third shell, or use a browser:
$ curl http://localhost:5000
Hello, World!

The code for this example can be found in this GitHub repo.
See the plan.sh and hooks/ for Habitat-related code.
The src/ directory is the actual Python app.

At this point, I declared success.

There’s a large amount of other pieces to the puzzle that I hadn’t explored yet, but getting this part running was the first one.
Items like interacting with the supervisor, director, healthchecks, topologies – these have some basic docs, but there’s not a bevy of examples or use cases yet to lean upon for inspiration.

During this process I uncovered a couple of bugs, submitted some feedback, and the team is very receptive so far.
There’s still a bunch of rough edges to be polished down, many around the documentation, use cases and how the pieces fit together, and what benefit it all drives.

There appears to be some hooks for using Chef Delivery as well – I haven’t seen those yet, as I don’t use Delivery.
I will likely try looking at making a larger strawman deployment to test these pieces another time.

I am looking forward to seeing how this space evolves, and what place habitat will take in the ever-growing, ever-evolving software development life-cycle, as well as how the community approaches these concepts and terminology.

A Quick Drop Into Data Structures For A Minute

So here’s the story, from A to Z…

Well, I’m not going to all the way to Z, but let me lay some details on you.

At Datadog, we provide a nice interface for configuring the Datadog Agent – it’s usually pretty simple to drop some YAML configuration into a file at a specific location, restart the Agent main process, and voil√†, you’ve got monitoring.

This gets more complicated when you want to generate a valid YAML file from another system, typically from something like Configuration Management, where you want to take the notion of “Things I know about this particular system” should then trigger “monitor this system with the things I know about it”.

In the popular open source config management system Chef, it is a common practice to create a template of the file you wish to place on a given system, and then extract particular variables to pass to a template ‘resource’, and use those as dynamic values that can make the template reusable across systems and projects, as the template itself can be populated by inputs not included in the initial template design.

Another concept in Chef is the ability to set node ‘attributes’ to control the behavior of recipes, templates and any amount of resources. This has pros and cons, neither of which I will attempt to cover here, but suffice it to say that the pattern is well-established that if you want to share your resources with others, having a mechanism of “tweaking the knobs” of your resources with attributes is a common way of doing it.

In the datadog cookbook for Chef, we provide an interface just like this. An end user can build up a list of structured data entries made up of hash objects (or maps or dicts, depending on your favorite language), and then pass that into a node object, and expect that these details will be rendered into a configuration file template (and restart the service, etc).

This allows the end user to take the code, not modify it at all, and provide inputs to it to receive the desired state.

Jumping further into Chef’s handling of node attributes now.

== Attribute
Attribute implements a nested key-value (Hash) and flat collection
(Array) data structure supporting multiple levels of precedence, such
that a given key may have multiple values internally, but will only
return the highest precedence value when reading.

Attributes are subclassed of the Mash object type – which has some cool features, like deep-merging lower data structures – and then attributes are compiled together to make collections of these node attribute objects, which are then “frozen” into another class type named Chef::Node::ImmutableArray or Chef::Node::ImmutableHash to prevent further mucking around with them.

All this is cool so far, and is really useful in most cases.

In my case, I want to allow the user to provide the data needed, and then have the data written our, or deserialized, into a configuration file, which can then be read by the Agent process.

The simple way you might think to do this is to tell the YAML module of Ruby’s standard library (which is actually an alias to the Psych module) to emit the structured YAML and be done with it.

In an Erubis (ERB) template, this would look like this:

<%= YAML.dump(array_of_mash_data) %>

However, I’d like to inject a header to the array before rendering it, so I’ll do that first:

<%= YAML.dump({ 'instances' => array_of_mash_data }) %>

What this does is render a file like so:

---
instances:
- !ruby/hash:Mash
  host: localhost
  port: 9999
  extra_key: extra_val
  conf:
  - !ruby/hash:Mash
    include: !ruby/hash:Mash
      domain: org.apache.cassandra.db
      attributes:
      - BloomFilterDiskSpaceUsed
      - Capacity
      foo: bar
    exclude:
    - !ruby/hash:Mash
      domain: evil_domain

As you can see, there’s these pesky lines that include a special YAML-oriented tag that start with exclamation points – !ruby/hash:Mash – these are there to describe the data structure to any YAML loader, saying “hey, the thing you’re about to load is an instance of XYZ, not an array, hash, string or integer”.

Unfortunately, when parsing this file from the Python side of things to load it in the Agent, we get some unhappiness:

$ sudo service datadog-agent configcheck
your.yaml contains errors:
    could not determine a constructor for the tag '!ruby/hash:Mash'
  in "<byte string>", line 7, column 5

So it’s pretty apparent that I can do one of two things:

  • teach Python how to interpret a Ruby + Mash constructor
  • figure out how to remove these from being rendered

The latter seemed most likely, since I didn’t really want to teach Python anything new, especially since this is really a Hash (or a dict, in pythonese).

So I experimented with taking items from the Mash, and running them through a built-in method to_hash – which seemed likely to work.

Not really.

<%= YAML.dump({ 'instances' => @instances.map { |item| item.to_hash }}) %>

That code only steps into the first layer of the data structure and converts the segment starting with host: localhost into a Hash, but the sub-keys remain Mash objects. Grr.

Digging around, I found other reported problems where people have extended Chef objects with some interesting methods trying to solve the same problem.

This means that I’d have to add library code to my project, then modify the template renderer to make the helper code available, then tell the template to render it using these subclassed methods, and then have to worry about it.

ARGH.

Instead, I tried another tactic, which seems to have worked out pretty well.

Instead of trying to walk any size of a data structure and attempt to catch every leaf of the tree, I turned instead to another mechanism to “strip” out the Ruby-specific data structure details, and keep the same structure, so I used the ol’ faithful – JSON.

By using built-ins to convert the Mash to a JSON string, then have the JSON library parse it back into a datastructure, and then serialize it to YAML, we remove all of the extras from the picture, leaving us with a slightly modified ERB method:

<%= JSON.parse(({ 'instances' => @instances }).to_json).to_yaml %>

I then took to benchmarking both methods to see if there would be any significant impact on performance for doing this. Details are over here. Short story: not much impact.

So I’m pretty happy with the way this turned out, and even if I’m moving objects back and forth between serialization formats, the end result is something the next program (Datadog Agent) can consume.

Hope you enjoyed!

The Importance of Dependency Testing

Recently I revisited an Open Source project I started over a year ago.

This tool is built to hook into a much larger framework (Chef), and leverages a bunch of code many other people have written, and produce a specific result that I was looking for.

This subject is less about the tool itself, rather the process and procedure involved in testing dependencies.

This project is written in Ruby, and as many have identified in articles and tweets, some project maintainers don’t adhere to a versioning policy, making it hard to ensure working software across multiple versions of dependencies.
A lot rides on the maintainer’s adherence to a versioning standard – one very popular one is Semantic Versioning, or SemVer for short.

This introduces a few other questions, like how frequently should a writer release new versions of code, how frequently should users upgrade to leverage new fixes, features, etc.

In any case, my tool was restricted to running the framework’s version 10.x, considering that between major versions, functionality may change, and that there is no guarantee that my tool will continue working.

A new major version of Chef was released earlier this year and most of my existing projects are still on Chef 10.x, as this is still being updated with stability fixes and security patches, and the ‘jump’ to 11 is not on the schedule right now, so my tool continues functioning just fine.

Time passes, and I have a project running Chef 11 that I want to use my tool with.

Whoops. There’s a constraint built in to the tool’s syntax of dependencies that will report that “you have Chef 11, this wants Chef 10.x and not higher, have a nice day”.

So I change the constraint, install locally, and see that it works. Yay!

Now I want to commit the change that I made to the version constraint logic, but I want to continue testing the tool against the 10.x versions, as I should continue to support the active versions for as long as they are alive and in use, right?

A practice I was using for the tests that I had written was: given a static list of Chef versions, use the static entry as the Chef version for installation/test.

This required me to update the static list each time a new version of Chef was released, and potentially was testing against versions that didn’t need testing – rather I wanted to test against the latest of the mainline release.

I updated my constraint, ran the test suite that I’ve written, and whoops, it failed the tests.

Functionality-wise, it worked correctly on both versions, so the problem must be in my test suite, right?

I found a cool project called Appraisal, that’s been around for a while, and
used by a bunch of other projects, and you can read more about it here.
It allows one to specify multiple version constraints and test against each of them with the same test suite.

Sure enough, passes on version 10, not version 11. Same code, same tests. #wat

So now it’s time to do some digging. I read through some of the Chef ChangeLog, and decide there’s too much to wade through there, rather let’s take a look at the code my tool is using.

The failure was triggering here, and was showing a default value.
This meant that Chef was no longer loading the configuration file that I provide here correctly.

So I took a look at the current version of the configuration loader, and visually compared it with the 10.x version.
Sure enough, there’s one small change that’s affecting me: Old vs New

working_directory? What’s this? Oh, it’s over here, just a few lines prior.

Reading the full commit, and the original ticket, it seems like this is indeed a good idea, but why are my tests failing?

After further digging around in the aruba test suite extension I’m using, I realize that the environment variable PWD remains set to the actual working directory of my shell, not the test suite’s subprocesses.
Thus every time it runs, the chef_config_dir is looking in my current directory, not the directory the tests are running in.

After poking around aruba’s source code, and adding some debugging statements during test runs, I figured out that I need the test suite to change it’s PWD environment variable based on the test’s execution, which led to this commit.

Why is this different? Well, before, Ruby’s Dir.pwd statement would be invoked from inside the running test, loading the config from a location relative to Dir.pwd, where I was placing the test config file.
Now the test was trying to load the config from the process’ environment variable PWD instead, and failing to find the config.

Tests, pass, and now I can have Travis CI continue to test my code with multiple dependencies when it changes and catch things before they go badly.

All in all, an odd behavior to expect in a normal situation, as my tool is mean to be run interactively by a user, not via a test suite that mocks up all sorts of other environments.

So I spent about 2-3 hours digging around to essentially change one line that makes things work better and cleaner than before.

Worth it? Completely, as these changes will allow me to continue to ensure that my tool remains working with upstream releases of the framework, and maintain compatibility with supported versions of the framework.

TL, DR: Don’t skimp on testing you project against multiple versions of external dependencies, especially when your target users are going to be using more than one possible version.

P.S. Shout out to my girlfriend that generously lets me spend time hacking on these kind of things ūüėÄ

A picture is worth a (few) thousand bytes

(Context alert: Know Chef. If you don’t, it’s seriously worth looking into for any level of infrastructure management.)

TL;DR: I wrote a Knife plugin to visualize Chef Role dependencies. It’s here.

Recently, I needed to sort out a large amount of roles and their dependencies, in order to simplify the lives of everyone using them.

It wasn’t easy to determine that changing one would affect many others, since it had become common practice to embed roles within other roles’ run_list, resulting in a tree of cross-dependency hell.
A node’s run_list would typically contain a single role-specific item, embedding the lower-level dependencies.

A sample may look like this:

node[web1] => run_list = role[webserver] => run_list = role[base], recipe[apache2], ...
node[db1] =>  run_list = role[database]  => run_list = role[base], recipe[mongodb], ...

Many of these roles had a fair amount of code duplication, and most were setting the same base role, as well as any role-specific recipes. Others were referencing the same recipes, so figuring out what to refactor and where, without breaking everything else, was more than challenging.

The approach I wanted to implement was to have a very generalized base role, apply that to every instance, then add any specific roles should be applied as well to a given node.

After refactoring node’s run list would typically look like:

node[web1] => run_list = role[base], role[webserver]
node[db1] =>  run_list = role[base], role[database]

A bit simpler, right?

This removes the embedded dependency on role[base], since the assumption is that every node with have role[base] applied to it, unless I don’t want to for some reason (some development environment for instance).

Trying to refactor this was pretty tricky, so I wrote a visualizer to collect all the roles from a Chef repository’s role_path, parse them out, and create an image.

I’ve used Graphviz for a number of years now, and it’s pretty general-purpose when it comes to creating graphs of things (nodes), connecting them (edges), and rendering an output. So this was my go-to for this project.

Selling you on the power of visualizing data is beyond the scope of this post (and probably the author), but suffice to say there’s industries built around putting data into visual format for a variety of reasons, such as relative comparison, trending, etc.
In fact some buddies of mine have built an awesome product that does just that – visualizes data and events over time. Check them out at Datadog. (I’ve written other stuff for their platform before, it’s totally awesome.)

In my case, I wanted the story told by the image to:

  1. Demonstrate the complexity of the connections between roles/recipes (aka spaghetti)
  2. Point out if I have any cyclic dependencies (it’s possible!)
  3. Let me focus on what to do next: untangle

Items 1 & 2 were pretty cool – my plugin spat out an increasingly complex graph, showing relationships that made sense for things to work, but also contained some items with 5-6 levels of inheritance that are easily muddled. I didn’t have any cyclic dependencies, so I created a sample one to see what it would look like. It looked like a circle.

Item 3 was harder, as this meant that human intervention needed to take place. It was almost like deciding on which area of a StarCraft map you want to go after first. There’s plenty of mining to do, but which will pay off fastest? (geeky references, are you surprised?)

I decided on some of the smaller clusterings, and made some progress, changing where certain role statements lived and the node <=> role assignment to refactor a lot out.

My process of writing a plugin developed pretty much like this:

  1. Have an idea of how I want to do this
  2. Write some code that when executed manually, does what I want
  3. Transform that code into a knife plugin, so it lives inside the Chef Ecosystem
  4. Package said plugin as RubyGem, to make distribution easy for others
  5. Test, test, test (more on this in a moment)
  6. Document (readme only for now)
  7. Add some features, rethink of how certain things are done, refactor.
  8. Test some more

Writing code, packaging and documentation are pretty standard practices (more or less), so I won’t go into those.

The more interesting part was figuring out how to plug into the Chef/Knife plugins architecture, and testing.

Thanks to Opscode, writing a plugin isn’t too hard, there’s a good wiki, and other plugins you can look at to get some ideas.

A couple of noteworthy items:

  1. Figuring out how to provide command-line arguments to OptionParser was not easy, since there was no real intuitive way to do it. I spent about 2 hours researching why that wasn’t doing what I wanted, and finally figured out that "--flag" and "--flag " behave completely different.

  2. During my initial cut of the code, I used many statements to print output back to the user (puts "some message"). In the knife plugin world, one should use the ui.info or ui.error and the like, as this makes it much cleaner and consistent with other knife commands.

Testing:

Since this is a command-line application plugin, it made sense to use a framework that can handle inputs and outputs, as that’s my primary concern.
With a background in systems administration and engineering, software testing has never been on the top of my to-learn list, so when the opportunity arose to write tests for another project I wrote, I turned to Cucumber, and the CLI extension Aruba.

Say what you will about unit tests vs integration tests vs functional tests – I got going relatively quickly writing tests in quasi-English.
I won’t say that it’s easy, but it definitely made me think about how the plugin will be used, how users may input commands differently, and what they can expect to happen when they run it.

Cucumber/Aruba also allowed me to split my tests in a way that I can grok, such as all the CLI-related commands, flags, options exist in one test ‘feature’ file, whereas another feature file contains all the tests of reading the roles and graphing them in different formats.

Writing tests early on allowed me to continue to capture how I thought the plugin will be used, write that down in English, and think about it for awhile.
Some things changed after I had written them down, and even then, after I figured out the tests, I decided that the behavior didn’t match what I thought would be most common.

Refactoring the code, running tests in between to ensure that the behavior that I wanted remained consistent was very valuable. This isn’t news for any software engineers out there, but it might be useful to more system people to learn more about testing.

Another test I use is a style-checker called tailor – it measures up my code, and reports on things that may be malformed. This is the first test I run, as if the code is invalid (i.e. missing a end somewhere), it won’t pass this test.

Putting these into a test framework like Travis-CI is so very easy, especially since it’s a RubyGem, and I have set up environment variables to test against specific versions of Chef.
This provides the fast-feedback loop that tests my code against a matrix of Ruby & Chef versions.

So there you have it. A long explanation of why I wrote something. I had looked around, and there’s a knife crawl that is meant to walk a given role’s dependency tree and provide that, but that only worked for a single role, and wasn’t focused on visualizing.

So I wrote my own. Hope you like it, and happy to take pull requests that make sense, and bug reports for things that don’t.

You can find the gem on RubyGems.org – via gem install knife-role-spaghetti or on my GitHub account.

I’m very curious to know what other people’s role spaghetti looks like, so drop me a line, tweet, comment or such with your pictures!

Quick edit: A couple of examples, showing what this does.

Sample Roles

(full resolution here)

Running through the neato renderer (with the -N switch) produces this image:

Sample Roles Neato

(full resolution here

Ask your systems: “What’s going on?”

This is a sysadmin/devops-style post.
Disclaimers are that I work with these tools and people, and like what they do.

In some amount of our professional lives, we are tasked with bringing order to chaos, keep systems running and have the businesses we work for continue functioning.

In our modern days of large-scale computing, web technology growth explosions, multiple datacenter deployments, cloud providers and other virtualization technologies, the manpower needed to handle the vast amount of technologies, services and systems seems to have a pretty high overhead cost associated with it. “You’ve got X amount of servers? Let’s hire Y amount of sysadmins!”

A lot of tech startups start out with some of the developers performing a lot of the systems tasks, and since this isn’t always their core expertise, decisions are made, scripts are written, and “it works”. ¬†When the team/systems grow large enough to need their own handler, in walks a system admin-style person, and may keel over, due to the state of affairs.

Yes, there are many tech companies where this is not the case, and I commend them of keeping their systems lean, mean and clean.

A lot of companies have figured out that in order to make the X:Y ratio work well, automation is required. ¬†Here’s an article that covers some numbers from earlier this year. ¬†I find that the statement of a ratio of 50 servers to 1 sysadmin pretty low on my view of how things can be, especially given the tools that we have available to us.

One of the popular systems configuration tools I’ve been using heavily is Chef, from Opscode. They provide a hosted solution, as well as an open-source version of their software, for anyone to use. ¬†Getting up and running with some basics is really fast, and there’s a ton of information available, as well as a really responsive community (from mailing lists, bug tracker site and IRC channel). ¬†Once you’re working with Chef, you may wonder how you ever got anything done before you had it. ¬†It’s really treating a large part of your infrastructure as code – something readable, executable, and repeatable.

But this isn’t about getting started with Chef. It’s about “what’s next”.

In any decent starting-out tech company, the amount of servers used will typically range from 2-3 all the way to 200 – or even more. ¬†If you’ve gone all the way to 200 without something like Chef or Puppet, I commend your efforts, and feel somewhat sorry for you. ¬†Once you’re automating your systems creation, deployment and change, then you typically want some feedback on what’s going on. Did what I asked this system to do succeed, or did it fail.

Enter Datadog.

Datadog attempts to bring many sources of information together, to help whomever it is that is supposed to be looking at the systems to make more sense of the situation, from collecting metrics from systems, events from services and other sources, to allowing a timeline and newsfeed that is very human-friendly.

Having all the data at your disposal makes it easier to find patterns and correlations between events, systems and behaviors – helping to minimize the “what just happened?” question.

The Chef model for managing systems is a centralized server (either the open source in your environment or the hosted service in Opscode), which tells a server what it is meant to “be”. ¬†Not what it is meant to “do now”, but the final state it should be in. ¬†They call this model “idempotent” – meaning that no matter how many time you execute the same code on the same server, the behavior¬†should¬†end up the same every time. ¬†But it doesn’t follow up very much on the results of the actions.

An analogy could be that every morning, before your kid leaves the house, your [wife|mother|husband|guardian|pet dragon] tells them “You should wear a coat today.” and then goes on their merry way, not checking whether they wore a coat or not. The next morning, there will get the same comment, and so on and so forth.

So how do we figure out what happened? Did the kid wear a hat or not? I suppose I could check by asking the kid and get the answer, but what if there are 200 of us? Do I have time to ask every kid whether or not they ended up wearing a hat? I’m going to be spending a lot of time dealing with this simple problem, I can tell you now.

Chef has built-in functionality to report on what Chef did – after it has received its instructions from the centralized server. It’s called the “Exception and Report Handlers” – and this is how I tie these two technologes together.

I adapted some code started by Adam Jacob @Opscode, and extended it further into a complete RubyGem with modifications for content, functionality and some rigorous testing.

Once the gem was ready, now I have to distribute it to my servers, and then have it execute every time Chef runs on that server. So, based on the chef_handler cookbook, I added a new recipe to the datadog cookbook Рdd-handler.

What this does is adds the necessary components to a Chef execution, and when placed at the beginning of a “run”, will capture all the events and report back on the important ones to the Datadog newsfeed. ¬†It will also push some metrics, like how long the Chef execution too, how many resources were updated, etc.

The process for getting this done was really quite simple, once you boil down all the reading, how’s and why’s – especially if you use git to version control your chef-repo. ¬†The `knife cookbook site install` command is a great method for keeping your git repo “safe” for future releases, thus preserving your changes to the cookbook, allowing for merging of new code automatically. Read more¬†here.

THE MOST IMPORTANT STUFF:

Here’s pretty much the process I used (under chef/knife version 0.10.x):

$ cd chef-repo
$ knife cookbook site install datadog
$ vi cookbooks/datadog/attributes/default.rb

At this point, I head over to Datadog, hit the “Setup” page, and grap my organization’s API Key, as well as create a new Application Key named “chef-handler” and copy the Hash that is created.

I place these two values into the `attributes/default.rb` file, save and close.

$ knife cookbook upload datadog

This places the cookbook on my Chef server, and is now ready to be referenced by a node or role. I use roles, as it’s much more manageable across multiple nodes.

I update the `common-node`¬†role we have to include “recipe[datadog::dd-handler]” as one of the first receipes to execute in the run list.

The common-node role applies to all of our systems, and since they all run chef, I want them all to report on their progress.

And then let it run.

END MOST IMPORTANT STUFF

Since our chef-client runs on a 30 minute interval, and not all execute at the same¬†time, this makes for some interesting graphs at the more recent time slices – not all the data comes in at the same time. ¬†That’s something to get used to.

Here’s an image of a system’s dashboard with only the Chef metrics:

Single Instance dashboard
It displays a 24-hour period, and shows that this particular instance had a low variance in its execution time, as well as not much is being updated during this time (a good thing, since it is consistent).

On a test machine I tossed together, I created a failure, and here’s how it gets reported back to the newsfeed:

 

Testing a failure
As you can see, the stacktrace attempt to provide me with the information I need to diagnose and repair the issue. Once I fix it, and apache can start, this event was logged in the “Low Priority” section of the feed (since succeses are expected, and failures are¬†aberrant¬†behavior):

Test passes

All this is well and wonderful, but what about a bunch of systems? Well, I grabbed a couple snaps off the production environment for you!

These are aggregates I created with the graphing language (had never really read it before today!)

Production aggregate metrics

By being able to see the execution patterns, and a bump closer to the left side of the “Resource Updated” graph – I then investigated, and someone had deployed a new rsyslog package – so there was a temporary increase in deploying the resources, and now there are slightly more resources to manage overall.

The purple bump seen in the “Execution Time” graph led me to investigate, and found a timeout in that system’s call to an “apt-get update” request – probably the remote repo was¬†unavailable¬†for a minute. Having the data available to make that correlation made this task of investigating this problem really fast, easy, and simple – more importantly since it has been succeeding ever since, no cause for alarm.

So now I have these two technologies – Chef to tell the kids (the servers) to wear coats, and Datadog to tell the parents (me) if the kids wore the coats or not, and why.

Really, just wear a coat. It’s cold out there.

———–

Tested on:

  • CentOS 5.7 (x64), Ruby 1.9.2 v180,¬†Chef 0.10.4
  • Ubuntu 10.04 (x64), Ruby 1.8.7 v352, Chef 0.9.18
Used: