=== mup_ is now known as mup === frankban|afk is now known as frankban [08:33] Guys, is it possible to deploy an application on a machine with either a tag test1 or test2? [08:34] cloud provider is MAAS [13:06] junaidali: You can use the --constraints tags= parameter. [13:08] mark-dickie: can we specify a constraints like `--constraints tags=`? [13:10] to deply on a machine with a tag either test1 or tes2* === Guest99060 is now known as med_ === med_ is now known as medberry [14:07] did something come across about being able to deploy bundles to pre-existing machines recently? [14:11] bdx: it's something being hacked on in the side time. === medberry is now known as med_ [14:28] rick_h: thx === disposable3 is now known as disposable2 === frankban is now known as frankban|afk [16:56] A best practice question of MAAS and Juju: does my Juju controller need to run on its own MAAS node, or would it be reasonable to run on the MAAS controller? [17:05] andrew-ii: so for testing definitely so what makes sense [17:06] andrew-ii: but for production, with an HA controller setup we recommend own nodes so that you can migrate and have full safety of those controllers [17:08] rick_h: does that impact bringing Juju charms on the internet, when MAAS is the proxy for everything (any challenges I should watch for?) [17:08] (I am planning to use Openstack) [17:09] andrew-ii: so if maas is proxying for the nodes that come up it should be ok. One thing folks have done is to manually create a VM and register that in maas [17:09] so you bootstrap to MAAS, but use constraints (--to=xxx) to target the VM node in maas for the controller [17:10] Huh. Neat. That's a pretty cool design [17:17] andrew-ii: yea, it helps isolate the controller in case you need to blow stuff away later and keeps everything behaving as normal maas setup [17:28] Thanks rick_h. I have the hardware to make that work, I just wanted to make sure I didn't shoot myself in the foot at the start [17:46] Hi all, so I've moved my maas controller to a hyper-v server and I'm trying to move my juju controller there, but having issues. I'd rather have a VM host this than a full node. Has anyone else done this? [17:48] jamesbenson: moving an already running controller? [17:48] fresh is fine with me :-) [17:48] I was having issues deploying the controller in a VM because I didnt' get the reboot typing right... [17:48] since maas can't do hyper-v [17:49] jamesbenson: hmm, k. so I don't know about maas and hyper-v tbh. If you can get it registered in maas just tag the node with a special tag and bootstrap --constraints to target it during bootstrap [17:50] yeah, I got the VM registered on Maas, but the power types don't exist for hyper-v... tagging was the way to go though for making sure it got the right one [19:22] snaps, why does it always have to be snaps... [19:25] seriously though, all of the charms tools versions where switched to snaps [19:26] and aparently snapd doesn't run on this box, and its installed and there is no service for it [19:30] xarses what is the nature of your box? [19:33] wsl, 12.04 [19:33] all of the docs for all the juju versions had non-snap directions a few months ago [19:35] erm, 14.04 even [19:37] xarses, i know. it was changed to snaps b/c the PPA wasn't supported anymore [19:38] it may still work [19:39] ppa's have been removed totally? or just for charms project? [19:41] axw: sure I can give each DC a different name. thanks i'll give that a shot. [19:44] xarses, just charm tools [19:46] and like i said, it may still work [19:47] sigh, sounds not fun [19:47] https://launchpad.net/charm-tools [20:10] <[Kid]> is there a way to run the juju controller in a lxc container on a remote node? [20:10] <[Kid]> instead of localhost [20:10] <[Kid]> i tried juju bootstrap maas maas-controller --to lxd:containername but it didn't like that [20:57] [Kid]: not atm, it's not supported. [21:05] <[Kid]> ok, then how about HA between two localhost controllers? [21:05] <[Kid]> on different physical hosts [21:05] <[Kid]> provided they can talk to each other? [21:06] <[Kid]> i.e. lxd network bridge on each host [21:06] [Kid]: so at the moment that's waiting on some work taking place in lxd to enable building a lxd cluster. [21:06] [Kid]: then it'll allow juju to treat it as a cloud and lxd will provision containers and load balance and such [21:07] <[Kid]> so it will basically be an lxd cloud? [21:07] <[Kid]> lxd cloud provider [21:07] [Kid]: the best thing at the moment is to build a lxd environment on each machine and use the cross model relations feature in the upcoming 2.3 release (in beta now) to have things speak across the machines [21:07] [Kid]: exactly [21:07] [Kid]: take 5 machines, build a lxd cluster on them, and point juju at them to manage multiple models of running applications [21:08] <[Kid]> that sounds perfect [21:08] <[Kid]> but that is waiting on some work in lxd right now? [21:09] [Kid]: right [21:10] <[Kid]> could i not just build a controller on each physical machine right now under the same model and do a juju enable-ha? [21:11] <[Kid]> brb, i would like to finish this shortly