[01:33] <thumper> nope, I think it was all me
[04:25] <thumper> https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/11707 for anyone
[14:35] <achilleasa> manadart: added some comments to 11683
[14:48] <manadart> achilleasa: Responded. I think those things are OK.
[15:12] <manadart> hml: If you've time in your day, can you look at https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/11706 ? It's the one that removes networkingcommon logic.
[15:12]  * manadart is off home.
[15:12] <hml> manadart:  will do
[15:12] <manadart> Ta.
[15:14] <hml> stickupkid: do you have time for teddybear?
[15:14] <stickupkid> i do
[15:14] <stickupkid> daily?
[15:14] <hml> stickupkid: omw
[15:57] <achilleasa> looks like we need to update our dep list for kvm on focal... " Package 'libvirt-bin' has no installation candidate"
[16:38] <achilleasa> hml: on a sidenote, shouldn't I be able to start a kvm machine with a bionic image on a focal host?
[16:38] <hml> achilleasa:  i’d think so
[16:38] <achilleasa> hml: ah... looks like it's broken for focal on focal :-(
[16:38] <hml> achilleasa:  what provider?
[16:39] <hml> achilleasa:  not sure you can start a kvm inside an lxd machine
[16:39] <achilleasa> manual machine; deploy --to kvm:X
[16:39] <achilleasa> (manual focal machine)
[16:39] <hml> achilleasa:  i’m having that trouble today too… even —to lxd:<manual> machine
[16:40] <achilleasa> hml: ' Requested operation is not valid: format of backing image '/var/lib/juju/kvm/guests/focal-amd64-backing-file.qcow' of image '/var/lib/juju/kvm/guests/juju-275797-0-kvm-3.qcow' was not specified in the image metadata (See https://libvirt.org/kbase/backing_chains.html for troubleshooting)'
[16:40] <hml> achilleasa:  what type is the manual machine?
[16:40] <achilleasa> guess I need to open bugs
[16:40] <achilleasa> focal provisioned via maas
[16:40] <achilleasa> using bionic boxes works though
[16:41] <hml> huh
[16:41] <achilleasa> also, focal libvirt-bin pkg -> libvirt-client
[16:42] <achilleasa> I will fix that in my kvm PR but the image format one is odd (also: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1801219)
[16:50] <achilleasa> petevg: I 've created https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju/+bug/1883575 to track ^. Should be able to land a fix in my upcoming kvm PR but we may need to backport
[16:50] <mup> Bug #1883575: Unable to deploy --to kvm:X on focal hosts <juju:In Progress by achilleasa> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1883575>
[20:56] <flxfoo> Hi there
[20:56] <flxfoo> quick one
[20:56] <flxfoo> on AWS
[20:56] <flxfoo> having 3 AZ
[20:57] <flxfoo> can I create a controller in each zone that would be able to manage the same models?
[20:57] <flxfoo> let's say in case a zone goes down...
[20:57] <flxfoo> thanks in advance
[20:59] <flxfoo> well I guess controller high availability page is what I am looking for :)
[21:02] <thumper> flxfoo: yes juju controllers work find across AZs
[21:16] <flxfoo> thanks @thumper , I enabled `juju enable-ha` and he did add another 2 controllers, but in the same AZ...
[21:24] <thumper> flxfoo: hmm... by default they should try to spread over the AZs
[21:24] <flxfoo> ok got it `--to` need to be used ...
[21:24] <thumper> flxfoo: can you add-machine in that model specifying an az?
[21:24] <thumper> flxfoo: which version of juju?
[21:25] <flxfoo> `juju enable-ha --to zone=<az1>,zone=<az2>` works
[21:25] <thumper> sweet
[21:26] <flxfoo> @thumper: yeah I though the default would have spread like when deploying, but it appears that one need to use `--to`, someone can confirm that?
[21:31] <thumper> flxfoo: I have had it spread before... perhaps it isn't as controlled as we'd like
[21:44] <flxfoo> @thumper:Just did a little test again, with a new controller (without constraints) and with 3 , it spreads over only 2 az...
[21:44] <flxfoo> @thumper:version is 2.8.0
[21:45] <flxfoo> @thumper:which instance type so you use for controllers?