Record Sorting Requirements

Am attempting to load a large zone and keep getting:

yaml.constructor.ConstructorError: keys out of order: ab, a

I’ve debugged it down to the ordering of the records in the YAML input file. The following provides the error:

---
ab:
    type: A
    values: [1.1.1.1]
a:
    type: A
    values: [2.2.2.2]

What sorting standard should the YAML keys be treated with before being fed to OctoDNS?

[ross]

And whether you list them in “order” of the record or just some random order, I’m surprised it kicks it with an error.

That’s just the validations that we put on things internally so that the records are consistently setup. In an ideal world it probably would sort them in the order the RFC talks about them, that would be fine too, just not what was implemented for the sake of time (it’d also be tougher to do with the way the the yaml sorting can be hooked in.)

I’m going to re-open this issue for tracking improvements to the sorting stuff, but I have no ETA on when that might happen. Unfortunately pretty low priority compared to some of the other stuff I’d like to see land.

• Look at using one of the established natural sort order modules, didn’t find one when I wrote my version several years ago and now that there are OSS’d ones might as well use them
• Look at making sorting optional altogether. Related to #3
• Evaluate what it would take to sort the record keys in RFC order. Related to #4 which would better adhere to RFC naming as well

[ross]

Look at using one of the established natural sort order modules, didn’t find one when I wrote my version several years ago and now that there are OSS’d ones might as well use them Look at making sorting optional altogether. Related to #3

These two are in https://github.com/github/octodns/pull/70

Evaluate what it would take to sort the record keys in ~RFC order. Related to #4 which would better adhere to RFC naming as well

Not going to address this one now. Will make note of it in the #4 to potentially be addressed when that work happens.