[01:32] <thumper> wallyworld: https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/11027
[01:37] <thumper> phew
[01:37] <thumper> almost gave myself a heart attack there
[01:37] <thumper> forgot that I had manually stopped the controller on two nodes
[01:37] <thumper> and was then wondering why they didn't upgrade
[02:12] <hpidcock> https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/11028
[02:12] <thumper> hpidcock: trade ya
[02:12] <hpidcock> done
[02:12] <thumper> hpidcock: there was a pending forward port from nammn_de1
[02:12] <hpidcock> Yeah it had outstanding conflicts
[02:13] <thumper> hpidcock: does this bring forward the same one?
[02:13] <thumper> ah
[02:13] <thumper> ok
[02:14] <hpidcock> I think anastasiamac looked at https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/11027 for you
[02:14] <thumper> oh cool
[02:14] <thumper> thanks anastasiamac
[02:14] <hpidcock> So I guess I owe anastasiamac a PR now
[02:15] <anastasiamac> hpidcock: from u, i'll take it with interest... 2 prs :D
[08:37] <zeestrat> Morning! I have 2 charmhelpers PRs ready for review: https://github.com/juju/charm-helpers/pull/403 and https://github.com/juju/charm-helpers/pull/404
[09:30] <nammn_de1> hpidcock thumper yup,  while i was away some things got merged and ola, new conflicts ;/
[09:31] <nammn_de1> stickupkid: morning. ptal? https://github.com/CanonicalLtd/juju-qa-jenkins/pull/348
[09:31] <stickupkid> nammn_de1, lovely jubbly
[09:32] <stickupkid> manadart, ping
[09:32] <manadart> stickupkid: Pong.
[09:33] <stickupkid> manadart, quick ho, about my latest PR
[09:38] <nammn_de1> rick_h: can you oing me if you are around? got 2 things
[09:39] <stickupkid> nammn_de1, he's not online for another 3 hours
[09:40] <nammn_de1> stickupkid: i know just heads up, maybe to early to be doing a headsup
[09:43] <nammn_de1> stickupkid: see you are rewriting the firewallrules, how did you come across this?
[10:04] <stickupkid> nammn_de1, I refactored it as we don't use the firewall service directly, instead we use the firewallDoc inside a txn.Op
[10:04] <nammn_de1> stickupkid: roger
[11:15] <stickupkid> CR anyone: I've had this locally for a few weeks, others might find it useful https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/11029
[11:49] <nammn_de1> stickupkid: done
[11:51] <manadart> stickupkid: This is the change I talked about in the HO. I have separated it from the big patch. https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/11030
[11:52] <stickupkid> manadart, cool, let me check
[13:19] <hml> achilleasa: review please https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/11031
[13:20] <achilleasa> hml: will do after standup if that's OK?
[13:20] <hml> achilleasa:  np
[13:23] <rick_h> nammn_de1:  sure thing, hop into daily early or do post-daily?
[14:38] <nammn_de1> rick_h stickupkid: just lookiung through that I realized, we already do have a local controller cache. I suspect we could just remove the caching there.
[14:38] <nammn_de1> What do you think?
[14:38] <nammn_de1> https://github.com/juju/juju/blob/ea5a7c89c9e0d4cacfc1f1da452a118877f34da8/etc/bash_completion.d/juju#L378
[14:38] <nammn_de1> The only advantage I can see is, if juju process itself hangs and we want to access the controllers
[14:43] <rick_h> nammn_de1:  if which process is hanging?
[15:16] <nammn_de1> rick_h: apologies, maybe this pr makes it more clear what I meant https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/11032
[15:27] <rick_h> nammn_de1:  looking
[15:33] <nammn_de1> rick_h: the bash completion is far from perfect, but this change should make it a little easier to use/less prone to show some errors because of the cache
[15:33] <nammn_de1> stickupkid: https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/11033 removing the not needed texts from set firewallrule
[15:50] <nammn_de1> rick_h: so testing for me was fine the whole day. But happy to get others testing. If we want to take a more conserative approach i would suggest just to change the error message to be empty  or do a simple retry: https://github.com/juju/juju/blob/develop/etc/bash_completion.d/juju#L273 because
[15:51] <rick_h> nammn_de1:  yea, just my own reservations as it's not something I play with much and has such an impact on filks
[16:09] <nammn_de1> rick_h: more conserative approach would be that one: https://pastebin.canonical.com/p/sMWVC4S2gC/
[16:09] <nammn_de1> it fails because it could not access the created cache in time and fill it. Kind of racy
[16:09] <nammn_de1> condition
[16:09] <rick_h> nammn_de1:  yea, that was my original thought was that if you hit a cache miss you prime the cache kind of thing but understand where you're going.
[16:10] <nammn_de1> rick_h: was my initial thought as well, just thought that we already had one and thus could just remove it
[16:10] <nammn_de1> but iam happy to propose this patch
[16:11] <rick_h> nammn_de1:  my main concern is that IS has complained to thumper about juju tab completion taking time and I was worried about calling out to Juju for any completion. It's just the one controller call but I'm curious on delay/timing feelings for end users
[16:11] <rick_h> nammn_de1:  that's why I'm just curious for other folks to try with different data in their controllers output to sanity check making a change that wfm but might have issues/delays for others with more data/etc
[16:12] <nammn_de1> rick_h: makes sense to me, We can let the pr open and see how other folks prime in
[16:12] <rick_h> nammn_de1:  kind of thing that tests well/fine with one or two controllers but might have unforseen issues with other folks
[16:12] <rick_h> nammn_de1:  yea I think we could land it with a request to test given it'll only show in the edge snap
[16:12] <rick_h> nammn_de1:  and recruit some feedback
[16:12] <rick_h> nammn_de1:  I don't think it'll get much feedback otherwise since folks will need to adapt their local completion scripts
[16:12] <nammn_de1> and if its too slow then maybe just remove/rewrite the "error message" could already help