Skip to main content

The new safekeeper

Some time ago I started using safekeeper in order to capture certain environment variables and embed them into my code (as template). Safekeeper is an obvious solution to a common problem so I was glad I did not have to implement rev 1. But once I started to review the code I realized some of the risks of 3rd party libraries, however, I was grateful safekeeper was only one small .go file.

Looking at the code I saw what I expected. All of the necessary code to perform the task at hand. A program that had a few parameters that hinted to the input and output of the task of string replacement. But what I also found was the inclusion of an additional package called or from kingpin. It was a command line parser package.

I looked at safekeeper from all directions trying to figure out what it was "exactly" that kingpin's CLI was doing better than the standard flag package. I could not find anything. Not even in the leftmost use case. So I forked safekeeper and implemented the CLI flags with the stdlib version.

Upon further reflection I have decided that I hate the implementation of the original safekeeper. Here is a sample:
//go:generate safekeeper --output=appsecrets.go --keys=CLIENT_ID,CLIENT_SECRET $GOFILE
 What makes it hideous is the "keys" parameter. The provided go:generate command executed the safekeep program and passes the subsequent parameters. One such parameter, keys, tells safekeeper which environment variables to use in the template. Then the code prefixes the keys with a string "ENV_" and then performs a number of string replaces in the template provided in the input param.

dumb dumb dumb.

(a) the stdlib already includes a template function
(b) it's easy to have collisions regardless of implementation
(c) why specify the keys and not use the entire ENV anyway, as-is

So the next time I have a swipe at safekeeper it'll be something like envtmpls or something like that... where one only specifies the input and ouput files and all of the data comes from the environment.


Popular posts from this blog

Entry level cost for CoreOS+Tectonic

CoreOS and Tectonic start their pricing at 10 servers. Managed CoreOS starts at $1000 per month for those first 10 servers and Tectonic is $5000 for the same 10 servers. Annualized that is $85K or at least one employee depending on your market. As a single employee company I'd rather hire the employee. Specially since I only have 3 servers.

The pricing is biased toward the largest servers with the largest capacities; my dual core 32GB i5 IntelNuc can never be mistaken for a 96-CPU dual or quad core DELL

If CoreOS does not figure out a different barrier of entry they are going to follow the Borland path to obscurity.

UPDATE 2017-10-30: With gratitude the CoreOS team has provided updated information on their pricing, however, I stand by my conclusion that the effective cost is lower when you deploy monster machines. The cost per node of my 1 CPU Intel NUC is the same as a 96 CPU server when you get beyond 10 nodes. I'll also reiterate that while my pricing notes are not currently…

eGalax touch on default Ubuntu 14.04.2 LTS

I have not had success with the touch drivers as yet.  The touch works and evtest also seems to report events, however, I have noticed that the button click is not working and no matter what I do xinput refuses to configure the buttons correctly.  When I downgraded to ubuntu 10.04 LTS everything sort of worked... there must have been something in the kermel as 10.04 was in the 2.6 kernel and 4.04 is in the 3.x branch.

One thing ... all of the documentation pointed to the wrong website or one in Taiwanese. I was finally able to locate the drivers again: (it would have been nice if they provided the install instructions in text rather than PDF)
Please open the document "EETI_eGTouch_Programming_Guide" under the Guide directory, and follow the Guidline to install driver.
download the appropriate versionunzip the fileread the programming manual And from that I'm distilling to the following: execute the answer all of the questio…

Prometheus vs Bosun

In conclusion... while Bosun(B) is still not the ideal monitoring system neither is Prometheus(P).


I am running Bosun in a Docker container hosted on CoreOS. Fleet service/unit files keep it running. However in once case I have experienced at least one severe crash as a result of a disk full condition. That it is implemented as part golang, java and python is an annoyance. The MIT license is about the only good thing.

I am trying to integrate Prometheus into my pipeline but losing steam fast. The Prometheus design seems to desire that you integrate your own cache inside your application and then allow the server to scrape the data, however, if the interval between scrapes is shorter than the longest transient session of your application then you need a gateway. A place to shuttle your data that will be a little more persistent.

(1) storing the data in my application might get me started more quickly
(2) getting the server to pull the data might be more secure
(3) using a push g…