[00:10] hey upgrade-charm --switch works [00:10] that is awesome [00:15] wallyworld_: was there a command to print the current enviroment ? [00:15] nm, juju switch without a name [00:15] yeah [00:16] davecheney: how did the hp cloud demo go? well i hope [00:19] wallyworld_: yeah, it's working well [00:19] marco is demoing juju deployer [00:19] great [00:19] and about to wow them with an import of a whole openstack HA setup [00:19] entirely hands off [00:19] good luck :-) [00:19] wallyworld_: thanks, we've tested this [00:19] well, at least once [00:20] how many machines do you need for openstack HA? [00:21] dozen at least [00:21] can't wait till containers are cooked a bit more so we can reduce that [00:22] man, the lack of the auto layout in the gui is killing us [00:22] i thought they were going to work on that? [00:22] something was said in oakland anyway [00:23] wallyworld_: yes, i wonder why it hasn't landed [00:23] wallyworld_: have you used upgrade-charm --switch much ? [00:24] no, not at all sorry [00:24] fair enough [00:24] is there an issue? [00:24] i guess that is thumper/rog/fwereade [00:24] wallyworld_: no, it looks like it works [00:24] great [00:24] we didn't relalised it was done [00:24] which is good [00:25] because it hepls when you need to fix a charm locally [00:54] thumper: just as a heads up, i hope you haven't started on the lxc-clone thing discussed at iom, i'm planning to dive down into it tomorrow as soon as my other branch lands. [00:58] arosales: not sure if you are around - do you have a preference for juju tools location? perhaps "http://juju.canonical.com/tools" afaiui, we want to avoid using ubuntu in the url? i need to ask IS if they can set up that location [01:02] wallyworld_: when you have a moment, can you please review this (regarding syslog)? https://codereview.appspot.com/12909044/ [01:03] rsyslog even - apparently you wrote that [01:03] sure [01:03] ta [01:04] axw: it was written with the understanding that we would not deploy services to the bootstrap node unless in a container. clearly now that we have the --to option, that is no longer true :-/ [01:04] wallyworld_: yeah I figured that was the case [01:04] my "solution" is still not perfect even [01:04] if you have multiple state servers... they're not going to see each others' logs [01:04] wallyworld_: that url looks good [01:05] davecheney: ta. afaik, juju.canonical.com doesn't exist yet, so i'll see if IS can set everything up for me [01:05] davecheney: heya. I reproduced that line-ending issue on lcy02 yesterday [01:06] axw: and I just ran into it on ec2 [01:06] it doesn't happen every time .... ?!? [01:06] davecheney: seems the rsyslog conf file got mangled, and the "\n" got interpreted [01:06] ah [01:06] wtf :( [01:07] davecheney: if yo utake a look at /etc/rsyslog.d/25-juju.conf, then you'll see a " on its own line [01:07] it should be up a line, with a literal \n before it [01:08] I better update the bug that says it works fine on EC2 then [01:15] axw: sorry, i marked the merge proposal as not lgtm since there's a cleaner was we can check if a machine is a state server, and we can abstract it behind a method for possible subsequent refactoring when we go to ha [01:15] urgh, ec2 speed is killing me [01:15] wallyworld_: nps, thanks for the review [01:16] just bootstrapped a machine that had so little io bandwidth it could not unpack the tools [01:16] let me know if you have questions [01:16] wallyworld_: will do, ta [01:17] axw: see state/machine.go - it defines the jobs a machine can run and the db document for machine containing the Jobs attr [01:17] axw: nice diagnosis [01:18] sidnei: it is all yours :-) [01:18] wallyworld_: I would've done that actually, but Machine isn't exposed to SimpleContext at the moment. I see now there's only one place that NewSimpleContext is called tho, so it's easy enough to pass one through [01:19] axw: cool, i didn't really look too much at the surrounding code. i assumed a deployer or whatever would have had access to the machine it was operating on [01:20] wallyworld_: nope, but it will soon :) thanks for the comments [01:20] np [01:24] hi wallyworld_ [01:24] wallyworld_: how's the world? [01:24] g'day [01:24] busy [01:24] lots of simplestreams stuff swirling around [01:24] how was iom? sounds like it was good [01:24] * thumper nods [01:25] wallyworld_: yeah pretty good [01:25] didn't catch as much flak for the api lateness as i thought we might [01:25] :-) [01:25] thumper: thanks for implementing update-charm --switch [01:25] thumper: i'm on an ease of use mission, so hopefully soon juju will Just Work better [01:26] davecheney: ah... I didn't [01:26] wallyworld_: awesome [01:26] lots to do though [01:26] wallyworld_: got general agreement between me, jam and fwereade__ around -v meaning verbose, not showlog [01:26] \o/ [01:26] also, useful output by default [01:26] with -q meaning quiet [01:27] thumper: what about recognising that log != cli [01:27] yeah, we are going to log into $JUJU_HOME/juju.log (or something) for every command [01:27] log should go to file, with different stuff going to stdout for cli feedback [01:27] kinda like .bzrlog [01:27] wallyworld_: ack [01:27] cool, can't wait [01:28] wallyworld_: +1 [01:28] if it means we don't have to run the command twice to debug it [01:28] actually +1 million yen [01:28] i would have done it myself if i had the time [01:28] well, we wanted to make sure that we had agreement before starting [01:28] so we wouldn't get rebuffed in reviews [01:29] yeah, that too [01:29] thumper: wallyworld_ anything that gets most of hte debug shit out of hte logs [01:29] my initial email didn;t get much love way back when [01:29] it's really hard to demo juju and explain what is happening when 1/2 the line is full of shit like file:line etc [01:29] davecheney: ack [01:29] yep [01:30] same goes for the agents [01:30] thumper: the ability for a user to define a log config and have that used would be great too [01:30] which tend to log most things as debug then at info [01:30] wallyworld_: -1, overengineering [01:30] wallyworld_: I have a branch for that [01:30] there should be one log level [01:30] silent or not silent [01:30] davecheney: disagree [01:30] anything more than that goes into this log file [01:30] davecheney: there are two users here [01:30] developers and users [01:30] developers need configurable logging [01:31] users shouldn't have to look at it [01:31] ever! [01:31] what he said [01:31] also, as a developer, i might want to configure logging to there is a stdout sink [01:31] which is why we want useful output by default [01:31] and verbose meaning "show me more" not "show me the developer log messages" [01:31] thumper: sounds good to me [01:31] i never want to know about it [01:33] davecheney: "10mbit ethernet is considered high speed in australia" ;) I was thinking the same thing, but then remembered there will be other guests [01:33] axw: honestly, this is the best we get [01:34] yeah I know [01:34] the bigger problem will be their shitful captive wifi portal [01:47] axw: wallyworld_ thumper is there a way to show the default constraints ? [01:48] similar to juju get $SERVICE [01:48] davecheney: you mean the constraints specified on bootstrap i assume, which become the so-called environment constraints [01:49] wallyworld_: yes [01:49] i think there may be a get command of some sort, but i've not used it. i'll see if i can find what it may be [01:50] juju get-constraints blocks [01:50] juju get-constraints $SERVICE returns nothing [01:50] get-env constraints ?? [01:53] davecheney: I don't know actuall [01:53] y [01:53] i looked at the code, get-constraints should be the thing to use [01:53] not sure why it is blocking [01:56] * thumper tries to remember which nights in oakland were non-claimable [01:56] putting in expense reports [01:58] thumper: none of them :) [01:58] davecheney: well, we did have a team dinner didn't we? [01:59] * thumper is trying to remember [01:59] I remember the go meetup [01:59] but having trouble thinking of other evenings out [01:59] except for that horrible vegan place [02:00] thumper: the steak house on thursday ? [02:00] thursday was the go meetup [02:00] tuesday ? [02:01] sounds right, but I'm having a lot of difficulty remembering it [02:01] ah [02:01] kincaids [02:01] yes, I remember now [02:01] thumper: i don't think it matters [02:01] just make sure the number of days add up to the right number [02:01] davecheney: it matters to me :) [02:01] thumper: it was tuesday [02:02] ta [02:12] that was quick, thanks thumper [02:12] np [02:12] I saw it come up [02:12] axw: trivial ones means only one review needed [02:12] thumper: yup, thank you [02:13] actually we have an experiment coming up where we are moving to a "one lgtm needed" for a month [02:13] to see how it goes [02:13] hmmk [02:13] axw: there have been a number of times where good work is blocked on noone around to do a second review [02:13] I had a change last week where I got a "LGTM, this looks solid" and then a "NOT LGTM this is going to break everything catastrophically" ;) [02:14] the idea is that we'll be doing weekly reviews of modules [02:14] axw: which was that on? [02:14] thumper: a change to handling of Dying in the uniter/modes code [02:14] so that a uniter would die if it hadn't started yet [02:14] I can get the number if you're interested [02:15] no, that's fine [02:16] axw: also, technically I should be on-call reviewer today [02:17] this morning was catching up on all the emails [02:17] now expenses etc. [02:17] thumper: ah yes, what does that mean exactly? [02:17] generally, that your primary focus should be reviewing others code [02:17] and some bug work when not reviewing [02:17] if all that is done [02:17] then you can code [02:18] gotcha [02:18] otherwise people tend to prioritise their own work [02:18] and no one looks at bugs :) [02:18] thumper: doesn't mean people are going to call you up out of hours for reviews? :) [02:18] heh [02:18] no [02:18] :) [02:19] thumper: speaking of reviews, did you see my manual provisioner stuff? [02:19] I'd like to know if I'm on the right track... [02:19] axw: I haven't but I want to look at it [02:19] thumper: thanks. I have other stuff to carry on with for now [02:20] I need to get my wallet for the IOM expenses, but the dog is sleeping in front of the door and I really don't want to wake her up [02:20] * thumper nods [02:20] hehe [02:36] oops, that change was noise.. state isn't used directly in the code creating the deployer [02:39] thumper: turns out I should've added that method to state/api/agent/Entity, if anywhere at all [02:40] that code seems much more minimalist than state [02:40] should I be leaving it that way, or go ahead and add it in there too? [02:40] why do you feel it should be moved? [02:41] no I made a mistake in the first instance; the code I need to update uses api, not state [02:42] I'm updating jujud to check if it's a state server when creating a deployer context [02:42] and jujud is working with api/agent Entity objects, rather than state.Machines [02:56] ah.. [02:56] makes sense [02:56] why does jujud care if it is a state server for the deployer context? [03:01] thumper: because the deployer needs to not install rsyslog forwarding config if it's on a state server, or we get a feedback loop [03:02] bug 1211147 [03:02] <_mup_> Bug #1211147: Deploying service to bootstrap node causes debug-log to spew messages [03:15] thumper: thanks for the review comments. I realise it's ugly/messy, was more interested in making sure I wasn't way off with how I understood things should work [03:15] * thumper nods [03:15] axw: I think you are kinda there [03:15] so what's the "manual" provider going to do? [03:15] nothing? [03:15] right [03:15] a manual provider isn't really a provider at all [03:15] it exists just to be referred to? [03:15] * thumper nods [03:15] ok [03:16] more importantly, so we can distinguish between environmentally created machines [03:16] and ones you have added manually [03:16] the whole "destroy-machine" thing needs thought [03:16] yeah didn't even touch that yet [03:17] it seems that there needs to be a hook inside the machine agent so it can nuke itself [03:17] as in, remove the upstart job [03:17] and die [03:17] right now [03:17] without any way to discriminate between top level machines [03:17] the environ provider will raise an error [03:17] when it notices that a "manual" machine needs to die [03:17] because it can't find it [03:18] at least the process will die and restart [03:35] wallyworld_, +1 on juju.canonical.com/tools [03:35] arosales: great thanks, will get the ball rolling [03:36] wallyworld_, thanks, are you going to file an RT with IS? [03:36] yes [03:36] will do it today [03:48] wallyworld_, thank you [03:48] np, i'm looking forward to getting this all working [03:48] wallyworld_, ben also reports simple streams for HP and Azure are all set with the SRU for Azure inprogress to enable 12.04 on Azure [03:48] +1 on "it just works" [03:48] :-) [03:49] arosales: so we can theoretically delete the hack up simplestream data i did for hp cloud [03:50] i might test that locally [03:50] s/might/will [03:50] +1 on testing it :-) [03:50] wallyworld_, I think you have access to the sub hp account [03:51] yeah, i uploaded new metadata a day or so ago for the demo [03:51] wallyworld_, cool, and thank you [03:51] np [03:51] hope things are going well for you guys over there [03:51] its marco and dave that are in the trenches in japan [03:51] I am just assisting remotely [03:52] ah ok [03:52] but I hear things are going better now [03:52] \o/ [03:52] is tim around [03:52] thumper, ? [03:53] thumper, need to confirm your plan/travel for the Brisbane sprint [03:53] email is also out on that subject [03:54] o/ arosales [03:54] bigjools, hello [03:54] davecheney, all going well with the charm shool? [04:02] arosales: here [04:02] arosales: was having a coffee and some fud [04:03] thumper, umm coffee . . . [04:03] arosales: oh yes, as much as davecheney disagrees, I think they'll be fine without me [04:03] thumper, hey I was just going to check if you need to book any travel for the brisbane sprint [04:03] arosales: no, no I don't [04:03] thumper, ah, ok [04:03] :) [04:03] arosales: I should go edit some docs I guess [04:04] if the flights were better, it perhaps could have been an option [04:04] but it is another five days away [04:04] ah [04:04] which doesn't gel with the family [04:05] I had it calculated for me that i have been away for a total around 8 months since I started with canonical [04:05] wow [04:06] thumper, I updated the ss [04:06] thumper: arosales yup [04:06] whatever [04:06] after this week, I don't think there is anything you four can throw at me [04:07] davecheney: don't worry, you get to see me in October [04:07] thumper: :heart [04:07] davecheney: really, whazzup? [04:07] thumper: this week has been ... trying [04:07] davecheney, battle hardened [04:07] wallyworld_: second attempt: https://codereview.appspot.com/12852044 [04:08] axw: will look soon, just finishing a bit of stuff [04:08] nps, thanks [04:08] thumper, damn, I was looking forward to insulting you in person [04:08] bigjools: sorry dude [04:08] bigjools, lol [04:08] bigjools: you'll have to wait until next year, or when you're up to travelling again [04:08] bigjools, I don't know thumper seems like a dude not to mess with in person [04:08] probably safer over IRC [04:08] family has a trip planned for gold coast next winter [04:09] arosales: yes he's good at body checking [04:09] bigjools: and foot stomping ;-) [04:09] ah yes :) [04:09] thumper: cool, we could head there too and ruin it for you :) [04:09] arosales: just realised that SS is spread sheet, not secret service [04:10] ah yes, sorry about that [04:10] arosales: I just realised I am going to miss the Monday of the sprint [04:10] arosales: did have me wondering why they cared... [04:10] but I was only planning on being there one day anyway [04:11] thumper, lol [04:11] bigjools, well at least you will be able to make it for a few days. [04:12] thumper: so anyway yes, I am unlikely to be travelling anywhere for the forseeable future :/ [04:12] ok fellas I am going to get some sleep. Have a good day! [04:12] good night [04:12] davecheney, keep rocking the charm school, and may the juju force be with you. [04:13] nn arosales [04:45] I was considering leaving the office and coming back later for the meeting [04:45] but I can hear the kids not cleaning the kitchen [04:45] perhaps I'll just stay here for a bit === thumper is now known as thumper-afk [05:31] https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1212538 [05:31] <_mup_> Bug #1212538: cmd/juju: deploy --to a non existent machine fails too late in the process

[05:59] what the heck is --format=constaints ? [06:00] what the heck is --format=constraints ? [06:01] mmm, love that legacy smell === tasdomas_afk is now known as tasdomas === thumper-afk is now known as thumper [07:58] mornin' all [07:59] morning rogpeppe [08:41] rogpeppe: can you review the trivial https://codereview.appspot.com/12768044/ please? [09:48] mgz: LGTM [09:53] how go-idomatic would it be to do something like... range over an anon struct, in real code, rather than just for table tests? [09:55] it's the closest thing I have to the python idiom of say `for key in ('thing', 'other'): val = getattr(obj, key, None); if val is not None: ...` [09:58] wallyworld_, ping [09:58] heya [09:59] wallyworld_, wondering about the deployer syslog change [09:59] ah, i did an initial review but forgot to take another look [09:59] wallyworld_, it's not immediately apparent how the unit logs will get to all-machines.log if we just make forwarding contingent on non-state-serveriness [10:00] wallyworld_, but you probably know if/how it will work without me digging ;p [10:00] you mean unit logs on state server machines? [10:00] wallyworld_, yeah [10:01] i must admit i didn't think that bit through as i was more concerned with stopping the loop [10:01] i think it will just be a tweak to the syslog conf when deploying on state server [10:02] but i'd have to look at the syslog docs [10:02] to see the specs for a "append to file" module [10:03] as opposed to a "forward to this port" module that we use now [10:03] * wallyworld_ still hates that we support deploying directly to state servers [10:05] * fwereade sympathises but doesn't think we can kill it yet [10:06] wallyworld_, hmm, when we get onto the HA work we'll probably have to consider job changes [10:06] yeah, likely [10:06] wallyworld_, and we could perhaps then default to creating state server machines without JobHostUnits [10:07] wallyworld_, but then I'm not totally wild about directly exposing machine jobs to the user [10:07] worth bearing in mid though [10:07] when do we expose machine jibs to the usrr? [10:07] wallyworld_, we'd have to if we wanted to keep a path to allow it [10:08] sorry, i must have missed something [10:08] wallyworld_, ah sorry [10:09] wallyworld_, I think we have to allow that path, evil and crackful though it may be, to enable cheap operation even without containers [10:09] wallyworld_, if we get containers everywhere the conflict disappears [10:09] wallyworld_, but if we have containers in *most* places I think it'd be ok to disallow units on 0 by default [10:09] fwereade: "allow that path" - not quite getting the context [10:09] wallyworld_, allow JHU on machine 0 [10:09] right [10:10] wallyworld_, I think we might be able to gradually restrict it [10:10] wallyworld_, but I suspect it will remain a valid (if distasteful) use case for the forseeable future [10:10] well if we can deploy containers to machine 0 easily, then problem solved [10:10] wallyworld_, yeah, but that depends on provider capabilities [10:11] yeah, i realise :-( [10:11] it was more wishful thinking [10:11] mgz: i'd need to see the actual code [10:12] wallyworld_, but if we have "enough" container addresability support we might be able to switch off JHU on 0 by default -- but we'd need some way to reenable it in annoying contexts... hence some level of user exposure to machine jobs [10:13] well maybe not Jobs per se - just allow users the ability to toggle the capability to host units from a semantic/logical perspective [10:17] wallyworld_, yeah, indeed, I'm just worried that we'll end up with full control of machine jobs in a really ad hoc way [10:17] wallyworld_, I'm just fretting uselessly really ) [10:17] i think you are - we would never expose jobs directly :-) just the abstract notion of "capability" [10:28] rogpeppe: in this case, I think I should actually just reuse an existing struct, and just not append if its lacking a value [10:28] mgz: i'm afraid i can't provide any useful input when i don't know the context :-) [10:34] fwereade: chat? [10:34] rogpeppe, I'm starting to think that this connection just straight-up hates hangouts, can we do it by irc perhaps? [10:35] fwereade: it's just possible that if you *start* a hangout, it might be hosted somewhere more sensible for you [10:35] fwereade: although that's possibly not how they work at all though [10:35] rogpeppe: `bzr diff -c1646 lp:~gz/juju-core/ec2_addresses` then `bzr diff -c1647 lp:~gz/juju-core/ec2_addresses` [10:53] does gocheck have any composable matchery things [10:53] ? [10:55] to do something like... c.Assert(aStruct, DeepEquals, ....actually, this doesn't make any sense in a go context, the types wouldn't match [10:56] that makes checking a list of structs where you don't care about one field more annoying [11:03] all: will miss standup again as it's Thursday in town day [11:29] so, I'm going to try to join the standup hangout in a mo, but this connection seems to throw a fit whenever I do so [11:29] so if I'm not there don't wait for me [11:33] rogpeppe, jam: standup? [11:33] natefinch: good point [11:44] fwereade, rogpeppe: relation ops https://codereview.appspot.com/12990043 [11:49] fwereade, rogpeppe: I forgot KeyRelation() - i'll be adding it [11:58] fwereade: shouldn't I do that? [12:19] rogpeppe, fwereade: poke :) [12:19] dimitern: i'm on it [12:19] rogpeppe: thanks [12:29] dimitern: reviewed [12:30] rogpeppe: cheers [12:30] rogpeppe: didn't want to use the struct by value to avoid copying in stateEndpointToParams [12:30] rogpeppe: does that apply? [12:31] dimitern: no [12:31] rogpeppe: ok [12:31] dimitern: i mean, it will be copied, but the cost of that is irrelevant [12:31] dimitern: there's more cost from the allocation [12:31] rogpeppe: :) [12:31] rogpeppe: noted [12:32] natefinch, sidnei: RE bug 1208504, I've got a fix (now that I've got an HP account to test) - it's pretty straight forward. Though unit-testing it is proving a little more difficult (the test double for openstack doesn't seem to have something similar to the ec2 double's SetInitialInstanceState). [12:32] <_mup_> Bug #1208504: "error: no instances found" Post bootstrap on HP Cloud