[00:01] <blahdeblah> Anyone able to interpret the output of jam's script from https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju/+bug/1680683/comments/3 for me?  https://pastebin.canonical.com/185461/  Looks like something went wrong, possibly because it was run on a non-primary node?
[00:01] <mup> Bug #1680683: Poor "juju create-backup" performance <canonical-is> <juju:Incomplete> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1680683>
[00:04] <menn0> anastasiamac: looks like the "juju models" crash is related to a change in the prototype branch I'm working on.
[00:04] <menn0> anastasiamac: probably nothing to worry about
[00:05] <anastasiamac> menn0: what about destroy model? r u still seeing the failure? even with my fix :( ?
[00:05] <menn0> anastasiamac: still testing that
[00:05]  * menn0 is juggling 4 things at once
[00:05]  * anastasiamac still holds breath then 
[00:07] <menn0> anastasiamac: gah! i'm not even able to reproduce the problem without your fix now
[00:07] <blahdeblah> ah, worked it out - needs to be run on the primary
[00:07] <blahdeblah> anastasiamac: ^
[00:08] <menn0> anastasiamac: i'll let you know if I see the problem with your fix in place, but let's assume it's all good for now :)
[00:08]  * menn0 has to go
[00:09] <anastasiamac> menn0: excellent, i'll breath again then
[00:09] <menn0> anastasiamac: it's actually fairly likely I was seeing it in a controller that didn't have your fix
[00:10] <anastasiamac> menn0: awesome \o/ i'd suprised if u'd see it again :D
[00:10] <anastasiamac> (with my fix i mean)
[01:31] <axw> babbageclunk: standup?
[01:42] <menn0> anastasiamac: I like your confidence :)
[01:43] <anastasiamac> menn0: if m not confident in mymself, what m doing here?...
[01:43]  * anastasiamac sighs.. if only i could type
[01:43] <menn0> true :)
[05:16] <mup> Bug #1681287 changed: juju should retry failed update-status hooks <juju-core:Won't Fix> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1681287>
[05:22] <mup> Bug #1681287 opened: juju should retry failed update-status hooks <juju-core:Won't Fix> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1681287>
[05:34] <mup> Bug #1681287 changed: juju should retry failed update-status hooks <juju-core:Won't Fix> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1681287>
[07:10] <wallyworld> axw: if vsphere vms have extraConfig metadata that can hold tags, why do we still also need folders?
[07:11] <axw> wallyworld: AFAIK you can't see the metadata in the UI
[07:11] <axw> wallyworld: folders are the standard way of organising
[07:11] <wallyworld> ok, so purely a user facing aide, that seems fine
[07:12] <axw> wallyworld: it also makes various DestroyController more efficient, since you don't need to trawl through all the VMs then
[07:12] <axw> not a big deal, but it's something
[07:12] <wallyworld> yeah, i noticed that
[07:13] <wallyworld> btw, my isp is having issues atm, so i can't get to launchpad or streams.canonical.com :-(
[07:13] <wallyworld> sigh, makes it hard to look into 2.2 bugs
[07:16] <wallyworld> axw: pr lgtm, we'll need to ensure CI tests are updated etc
[07:18] <axw> wallyworld: thanks. CI should add a test for migrate & kill-controller, I think everything else is covered
[07:18] <wallyworld> axw: i was thinking specifically of verifying folder structure etc
[07:19] <axw> wallyworld: ok. I don't know what we normally test in that regard, but seems reasonable
[07:19] <wallyworld> yeah, especially since it's a user facing artefact we are relying on
[08:23] <axw> wallyworld: I've made a small change so that the upgrade step no longer removes the old metadata. it causes an error when the value is empty
[08:23] <axw> (despite what the docs suggest...)
[08:24] <wallyworld> ok
[08:24] <wallyworld> i doubt it will matter much in practice
[08:25] <axw> wallyworld: just a little messy, no big deal
[08:25] <axw> nobody sees it anyway
[08:25] <wallyworld> yep
[08:33] <mattyw> who's ready for a question?
[08:33] <mattyw> wallyworld, you for example?
[08:33] <ashipika> o/ ;)
[09:54] <jam> anyone around that can look at https://github.com/juju/txn/pull/28
[09:55] <jam> wpk: ^^ its not your area but maybe you'd like exposure :)
[09:55] <jam> I was hoping wallyworld or axw might still be around
[09:55] <axw> jam: I am but need to go pick kids up from my mother in law's
[09:55] <jam> oh sure, play the mother-in-law card :)
[09:56] <jam> axw: np
[09:56] <axw> jam: if I get a chance I'll look later on
[09:56] <jam> it is small
[09:56] <jam> its a bug that hasn't landed in juju-core proper yet, cause I was testing it before landing
[09:56] <jam> but lack of testing in juju/txn
[09:56] <axw> jam: yeah that's trivial, I can review now
[09:57] <axw> jam: LGTM
[10:07] <joedborg> Quick juju question - will 2.2 have the same behaviour as 2.1.2 in terms of not automatically bridging interfaces?
[10:23] <rick_h> joedborg: yes, the behavior will be the same as far as I'm aware. You'll need to specify interfaces you want setup on containers.
[10:23] <joedborg> cheers rick_h!
[10:41] <babbageclunk> axw: ping?
[10:41] <babbageclunk> or menn0: ping?
[10:42] <menn0> babbageclunk: hi (not working though)
[10:42] <babbageclunk> menn0: just a really quick question, promise
[10:43] <menn0> babbageclunk: ok
[10:43] <babbageclunk> menn0: It seems like units on a machine could be bound to different spaces?
[10:45] <babbageclunk> menn0: But then wouldn't they have different public addresses? Or is only one space able to have public addresses?
[10:46] <babbageclunk> menn0: the code only supports (zero or) one public address for the machine and unit.PublicAddress() just delegates to the machine, so I guess I'm wrong.
[10:47] <menn0> babbageclunk: AFAIK they could have different public addresses
[10:47] <menn0> babbageclunk: i'm not sure, but I think the idea of single public address was a overly simplisitic idea which I think we're moving away from
[10:47] <babbageclunk> menn0: Hmm.
[10:48] <menn0> jam would know better
[10:48] <babbageclunk> menn0: ok, thanks.
[10:48] <menn0> machine/unit.PublicAddress() is probably problematic
[10:48] <babbageclunk> menn0: I just realised jam would be the person to ask.
[10:49] <menn0> and it's his afternoon so hopefully he's about or will be back soon
[10:50] <babbageclunk> menn0: yeah, good call - sorry to distract you! Thanks for confirming that there's probably something fishy going on there, anyway.
[10:50] <menn0> babbageclunk: no worries - don't work too late :)
[10:50] <babbageclunk> menn0: no, I'm about to crash out (or get shanghaied by a baby)
[10:54] <babbageclunk> jam: I'm probably going to have to drop soon, but if/when you see this any insights would be welcomed!
[11:06] <jam> babbageclunk:
[11:06] <jam> if you're around, I can join a HO or we can IRC
[11:07] <jam> was just on a phone call
[11:07] <babbageclunk> jam: hey - still here, let's hangout!
[11:08] <jam> babbageclunk: https://hangouts.google.com/hangouts/_/canonical.com/afternoon-jam?authuser=1
[11:35] <babbageclunk> jam: you froze
[11:36] <jam> yeah, brb
[11:37] <jam> trying to reconnect
[21:02] <thumper> anastasiamac: coming...
[21:02] <thumper> just restarting chrome
[22:47] <babbageclunk> wallyworld: around?
[22:47] <wallyworld> babbageclunk: i am, but am waiting to head into a meeting
[22:48] <babbageclunk> wallyworld: ok, I'll grab you after.
[22:48] <wallyworld> babbageclunk: was it a quick question?
[22:49] <babbageclunk> wallyworld: maybe (or else it can be something to distract you in a boring meeting) - are you sure that a unit won't enter scope until it's assigned?
[22:49] <babbageclunk> (to a machine)
[22:49] <babbageclunk> wallyworld: there's code in the ingress address watcher that suggests otherwise, although I'm not sure whether that's defensive coding.
[22:49] <wallyworld> babbageclunk: i thought i was sure yes
[22:50] <wallyworld> it's defensive
[22:51] <babbageclunk> ok - needing to handle that would make the stuff I'm doing quite a bit fiddlier (I think)
[22:51] <wallyworld> yeah
[22:53] <babbageclunk> wallyworld: oh, one more quick one - the IAWatcher maintains a set of addresses (as the current output) and the known map (unit -> address) in sync. I'm tempted to generate the former from the latter when it's needed - is there any problem with that?
[22:54] <babbageclunk> wallyworld: I'll get the tests passing the way it is and do the change in a separate commit to see if that breaks anything.
[22:54] <wallyworld> babbageclunk: not really, given the size of the lists etc, should be ok
[22:55] <babbageclunk> cool cool
[22:55] <babbageclunk> thanks
[22:55] <wallyworld> nw
[23:19] <cmars> is there something in juju that can tell me the OS name (not series) of a machine? like "ubuntu" instead of "trusty", "windows" instead of "win2008somethingsomething", etc.?
[23:19] <cmars> by something i mean go function in juju/juju/...
[23:25] <cmars> aha, juju/utils/series.GetOSFromSeries
[23:42] <hml> anastasiamac: ty, i forgot about adding the pr to the bug
[23:42] <anastasiamac> hml: nps :)