feat(context): pass nginx to snippets and server_config contexts

[sticky-note]

PR progress checklist (to be filled in by reviewers)

• Changes to documentation are appropriate (or tick if not required)
• Changes to tests are appropriate (or tick if not required)
• Reviews completed

---

What type of PR is this?

Primary type

• [build] Changes related to the build system
• [chore] Changes to the build process or auxiliary tools and libraries such as documentation generation
• [ci] Changes to the continuous integration configuration
• [feat] A new feature
• [fix] A bug fix
• [perf] A code change that improves performance
• [refactor] A code change that neither fixes a bug nor adds a feature
• [revert] A change used to revert a previous commit
• [style] Changes that do not affect the meaning of the code (white-space, formatting, missing semi-colons, etc.)

Secondary type

• [docs] Documentation changes
• [test] Adding missing or correcting existing tests

Does this PR introduce a BREAKING CHANGE?

No.

Related issues and/or pull requests

Describe the changes you're proposing

pass nginx to snippets and server_config contexts

Pillar / config required to test the proposed changes

Debug log showing how the proposed changes work

Documentation checklist

• Updated the README (e.g. Available states).
• Updated pillar.example.

Testing checklist

• Included in Kitchen (i.e. under state_top).
• Covered by new/existing tests (e.g. InSpec, Serverspec, etc.).
• Updated the relevant test pillar.

Additional context

[vutny]

Seems to be useful, thanks.

[aboe76]

I see no issues

[myii]

Shouldn't be a problem however we have had a report about memory issues when passing full dicts by context:

• [BUG] apache.vhosts.standard (and potentially others) generate MemoryError apache-formula#297

Something we need to consider in the long run.

[aboe76]

@myii I think you are right, about that considering the memory issues. especially on large configurations.

[sticky-note]

That's exactly why I waited for a review @myii
At which number of vhosts can we consider a large deployment ?
The idea a making a local copy of nginx map, popping nginx:servers:managed and passing that copy to each templates seems attractive. Will it be sufficient?

[sticky-note]

@vutny @myii @aboe76,
Seems to consume significantly less RAM on sls rendering with:

{%- set _nginx = nginx.copy() %}
{%- do _nginx.pop('snippets') %}
{%- do _nginx.pop('servers') %}

@myii Ok to merge like that ?

[noelmcloughlin]

Updated PR looks fine to me.
I done something similar in saltstack-formulas/apache-formula#299

[saltstack-formulas-travis]

🎉 This PR is included in version 2.5.0 🎉

The release is available on GitHub release

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀