| [07:00] <mthaddon> jam: you may be interested in https://code.launchpad.net/~pjdc/charm-k8s-mattermost/+git/charm-k8s-mattermost/+merge/385953 - just looking over it now myself | |
| [07:22] <jam> mthaddon, thanks for the heads up | |
| [07:25] <mthaddon> jam: have just asked for some updates - I noticed the test pod spec structure is a bit different from what we're actually defining in the charm | |
| [08:46] <Chipaca> 👋 | |
| [09:16] <jam> heh | |
| [09:17] <jam> so it actually was something different than I thought | |
| [09:17] <jam> Chipaca, https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/4RKzm4PW5h/ | |
| [09:17] <jam> so I noticed that if I did: foo: "bar: 42" | state-set --file - | |
| [09:17] <jam> then when I did 'state-get' | |
| [09:17] <jam> It would say: | |
| [09:17] <jam> foo: "bar: 42" | |
| [09:17] <jam> but if I did | |
| [09:18] <jam> foo: |\n bar: 42 | state-set -file - | |
| [09:18] <jam> then the output would be | |
| [09:18] <jam> foo: | | |
| [09:18] <jam> bar: 42 | |
| [09:18] <jam> However, that is because those 2 strings are subtly different, can you tell why? | |
| [09:19] <Chipaca> jam: newline? | |
| [09:19] <jam> Chipaca, yep '|' includes a trailing newline '|-' and the one-line form do not | |
| [09:19] <Chipaca> phew | |
| [09:20] <Chipaca> if it wasn't that, it was cursed :-) | |
| [09:20] <jam> Chipaca, you can see the output of 'state-get foo' was 'bar: 42\n\n' | |
| [09:20] <jam> I thought it was somehow remembering how I set the value and preserving it, which didn't really make sense | |
| [09:20] <Chipaca> bar: 12\n\n i guess? | |
| [09:21] <Chipaca> i believe preserving layout was one of the goals of gustavo's yaml.v3, but i'm not 100% positive on that (nor on whether he achieved it) | |
| [09:21] <Chipaca> i never got to play with that, actually | |
| [09:21] <Chipaca> still on my ToDo | |
| [09:23] <jam> Chipaca, that is as go not python, though, right? | |
| [09:23] <jam> and not a YAML spec but just a parser quirk? | |
| [09:23] <Chipaca> correct | |
| [09:24] <jam> Chipaca, do we think it is a problem if we treat foo='' as NoSnapshot ? | |
| [09:24] <Chipaca> and maybe it wasn't layout but comments? | |
| [09:24] <jam> It is fine as long as your snapshot isn't just a string that can be empty | |
| [09:24] <jam> (we could enforce snapshots are dicts again :) | |
| [09:24] <jam> Chipaca, or I could do the "if we get '' read the whole state-get and see whether the key exists" | |
| [09:25] <Chipaca> so this is only a problem for a snapshot that serialises as a string, and only if it cares about the difference between a string and not being there | |
| [09:25] <Chipaca> right? | |
| [09:26] <Chipaca> snapshot returns a simple serialisable object and the ones writing it out into yaml is us, right? | |
| [09:26] <Chipaca> so what we could do, if the above is right, is !!str strings | |
| [09:26] <jam> Chipaca, actually, it isn't a problem, because we yaml.dump('') => "''\n" | |
| [09:26] <Chipaca> and then we know because we get '' vs '!!str ""' | |
| [09:26] <jam> yaml.load('') => None, but yaml.lod("''\n") => '' | |
| [09:26] <Chipaca> ahhhh | |
| [09:27] <Chipaca> also aaaaah *and* ahahaha | |
| [09:27] <Chipaca> jam: cool cool, then :) | |
| [09:27] <jam> Chipaca, I'll make sure to add '' to my permutation tests | |
| [09:31] <jam> hm. seems I also need to handle None | |
| [09:31] <jam> >>> print(yaml.dump(None)) | |
| [09:31] <jam> null | |
| [09:31] <jam> ... | |
| [09:32] <jam> yaml.safe_load('') => None, yaml.safe_load('null\n...\n') => None | |
| [09:35] <jam> Chipaca, and, of course, I'm simulating some of this via my own scripts, which is definitely stuff that I'd want to test against actual Juju | |
| [09:43] <Chipaca> jam: do we have a list of 'things we want to try in real jujus tee emm'? (should we?) | |
| [09:44] <jam> Chipaca, well, I consider that writing a 'juju test suite' as part of test-main was one of my goals of this PR | |
| [09:45] <Chipaca> facundo__: 'charmcraft --verbose build' not being exactly the same as 'charmcraft build --verbose' is surprising and painful | |
| [09:45] <jam> but we can split it out if we prefer | |
| [09:46] <Chipaca> jam: i hadn't realised that, is there any of this already up? (how were you approaching it?) | |
| [09:46] <Chipaca> s/were/are/ | |
| [09:48] <jam> Chipaca, that was part of my trying to make test-main be a RealCharm | |
| [09:48] <jam> but it isn't something I've actively started | |
| [09:48] <jam> Chipaca, my intent was to add an action to test_main, such that you could run "juju deploy test_main; juju run-action ops-tests" | |
| [09:48] <Chipaca> jam: given you can make travis install snaps, and in particular lxd snaps, i was hoping we'd be able to use that to run tests | |
| [09:49] <jam> Chipaca, snap install lxd; snap install --classic juju; juju bootstrap lxd; juju deploy; juju run-action | |
| [09:49] <jam> Chipaca, I don't expect it to be very fast (bootstrap lxd here is a minute or so) | |
| [09:49] <Chipaca> jam: i was thinking of looking at having it as a cron test rather than unit tests unless we got them to be faster than i expect them to be, though | |
| [09:50] <Chipaca> yeah | |
| [09:50] <Chipaca> i mean, up to ~5 minutes is probably fine for PR tests | |
| [09:50] <Chipaca> longer than that and i'd punt them to cron / manual | |
| [09:54] <Chipaca> heh, https://github.com/juju-solutions/charms.reactive/blob/master/.travis.yml | |
| [09:55] <Chipaca> and a job run: https://travis-ci.org/github/juju-solutions/charms.reactive/jobs/675789700 | |
| [09:55] <Chipaca> (somebody needs to tweak that travis, but it essentially seems to work?) | |
| [09:55] <Chipaca> anyhoo | |
| [09:58] <jam> Chipaca, "ran for 2min43s" isn't bad | |
| [09:59] <jam> apt install snapd pwgen is 80s of it | |
| [09:59] <Chipaca> jam: "didn't actually *run* run" kinda is tho =) | |
| [09:59] <jam> yeah, I see that now | |
| [09:59] <Chipaca> i mean, juju bootstrap fell over | |
| [09:59] <jam> It is doing the usermod, but not doing the newgrp so the active process knows it is in the group | |
| [10:00] <Chipaca> hopefully it's that and not some weird apparmor-inside-apparmor-inside-apparmor thing | |
| [10:00] <Chipaca> (travis already runs inside lxd in some situations) | |
| [10:00] <Chipaca> (i think it's when you're doing weird arches, and then it's in vms and not containers, but still) | |
| [10:05] <jam> Chipaca, ah right, they recently switched so amd64 can be run in a container | |
| [10:06] <jam> Chipaca, the actual failure is that it can't talk to the lxd socket, but that might be because lxd failed to start? | |
| [10:06] <jam> Chipaca, do you have any quick magic for timing what is taking long in a test run? | |
| [10:07] <jam> I've gotten some stuff to work with cProfile, etc, but it is always a bit clumsier than I would expect | |
| [10:07] <Chipaca> jam: i've monkeypatched the test constructors to track time | |
| [10:07] <Chipaca> jam: otoh pytest i think has things for that? | |
| [10:08] <Chipaca> let me see if i still have the monkey patching thing somewhere | |
| [10:09] <Chipaca> jam: pytest --durations=10 will print the 10 slowest tests | |
| [10:09] <jam> Chipaca, yeah, pytest-profiling sems to get me where I'd like to be | |
| [10:12] <jam> py.test test/test_storage.py::TestJujuStorage::test_emit_event --profile | |
| [10:12] <jam> gives me a cumulative time spent | |
| [10:13] <Chipaca> jam: --durations gives you something like | |
| [10:13] <Chipaca> 2.24s call test/test_main.py::TestMainWithNoDispatchButJujuIsDispatchAware::test_multiple_events_handled | |
| [10:13] <Chipaca> 2.21s call test/test_main.py::TestMainWithNoDispatch::test_setup_event_links | |
| [10:13] <Chipaca> etc | |
| [10:13] <Chipaca> jam: also, pip install pytest-xdist and then pytest -n $(nproc) | |
| [10:14] <jam> Chipaca, sure. The issue is that I know one test is running slow, and I'm trying to figure out why | |
| [10:15] <Chipaca> ahh | |
| [10:15] <Chipaca> you want timings _inside_ the test? | |
| [10:15] <Chipaca> that i don't have | |
| [10:15] <jam> Chipaca, yeah. Which --profiling gives me. the issue is that one of my tests with SQLite backend is about 3ms, and with Juju backend it is about 600ms | |
| [10:15] <jam> I'd like to understand why :) | |
| [10:16] <Chipaca> jam: did you set SSH_TO_THUMPERS_BOX=0 ? | |
| [10:17] <Chipaca> 600ms is enough time to do that and more … :) | |
| [10:17] <Chipaca> jam: what happens if you set PYTHONVERBOSE in the environ? | |
| [10:19] <jam> 376ms spent in subprocess.communicate, 376ms spent in wait() | |
| [10:19] <jam> stupid process barriers | |
| [10:20] <jam> Chipaca, PYTHONVERBOSE is a bit... verbose? :) | |
| [10:25] <jam> Chipaca, stripping it down to a single emit() shows it as 200ms, https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/XY7dmtXNxv/ | |
| [10:26] <Chipaca> jam: is something reading stdin/stdout with it being buffered on a timeout? | |
| [10:26] <jam> Chipaca, it is about 20m-30ms per subprocess invocation, we just do a lot of them for each emit() | |
| [10:27] <jam> Chipaca, $ time python3 -c '' | |
| [10:27] <jam> real 0m0.015s | |
| [10:27] <Chipaca> :-( | |
| [10:27] <Chipaca> jam: try -Sc | |
| [10:28] <jam> goes down to 7ms | |
| [10:28] <Chipaca> (not practical irl but good to know how low we could take it with some environ handholding) | |
| [10:29] <jam> Chipaca, gives "No module named 'yaml'" if I try it in the script | |
| [10:29] <Chipaca> yeah, as i say, not practical :) | |
| [10:29] <Chipaca> it comes up with a very empty pythonpath, for one | |
| [10:30] <jam> Chipaca, it works for the ones that don't need yaml, though | |
| [10:31] <jam> but that only shaves ~10ms off the test time | |
| [10:32] <Chipaca> jam: what are all the calls the reemit does? | |
| [10:33] <jam> so emit() calls _emit(), which does a 'save_snapshot()' for the event, then 'save_notice()' for each observer. | |
| [10:33] <Chipaca> and each of those is a save-set | |
| [10:34] <jam> then _reemit calls 'read all notices', and for each one it will then call load_snapshot and possibly drop_snapshot/drop_notice | |
| [10:34] <Chipaca> jam: right | |
| [10:35] <Chipaca> jam: sounds to me like we want to consider refactoring things to at least save in a batch | |
| [10:35] <Chipaca> but later | |
| [10:35] <Chipaca> i mean, let's not block save-set on this :) | |
| [10:35] <jam> so I think in practice it won't be as bad, 'juju run 'time state-get' is 5ms vs 20ms | |
| [10:35] <Chipaca> but let's not call save-set *done* without looking at it | |
| [10:36] <jam> but it is still a lot slower than interacting with an in-process SQLite file | |
| [10:36] * Chipaca reaches for his 'shocked pikachu' face again | |
| [10:37] <jam> Chipaca, 😲 | |
| [10:37] <Chipaca> :-) that's the on | |
| [10:37] <jam> 😱 | |
| [10:37] <Chipaca> nah that's the dog :-p | |
| [10:38] <jam> Chipaca, I do think given how much the Operator framework is based around events, we'll want to be cautious about its performance | |
| [10:38] <Chipaca> (somebody pointed it 'the scream' kinda looks like the guy tried to draw a dog and then somebody said 'oh wow a person screaming' and they went with it) | |
| [10:38] <jam> https://emojipedia.org/face-screaming-in-fear/ I'm not seeing the dog | |
| [10:38] <jam> nor here: https://www.bookdepository.com/Edvard-Munch-Masterpieces-of-Art-Candice-Russell/9781783613564?redirected=true&utm_medium=Google&utm_campaign=Base3&utm_source=AE&utm_content=Edvard-Munch-Masterpieces-of-Art&selectCurrency=AED&w=AFCFAU968L892MA8VCPZ&gclid=Cj0KCQjwoaz3BRDnARIsAF1RfLeKR4-ljbzhpZgajGSi2f4h-DLQp_FaX-dDHKqVeiWmSi23iue6HVAaAlf2EALw_wcB | |
| [10:39] <jam> Chipaca, ah, the hands are the ears | |
| [10:39] <Chipaca> there you go :) | |
| [10:39] <Chipaca> once you see it it's easy to flip-flop | |
| [10:40] <jam> if you get rid of the nose and mouth, then I can see the dog nose, but I don't see how they fit on the dog face | |
| [10:40] <jam> not as good a flip/flop as https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/duck-or-rabbit-the-100-year-old-optical-illusion-that-tells-you-how-creative-you-are-a6873106.html | |
| [10:40] <jam> duck bunny | |
| [10:41] <Chipaca> the duck/bunny one is very good (i first saw it on a joke) | |
| [10:42] <Chipaca> anyway. pop. | |
| [10:44] <Chipaca> facundo__: so, wrt charmcraft and secrets, i think a reasonable approach is to use keyring and have the snap ask for the secrets plug; it won't auto-connect, but we can detect the failure in code and fall back to plaintext (or notify the user to manually connect or pass --plaintext?) | |
| [10:45] <Chipaca> the token isn't a general-purpose do-anything token fwiw, which is why storing it plaintext isn't _that_ bad an idea | |
| [10:49] <jam> 'time python3 -c import yaml' is 30ms here.. :( | |
| [10:50] <Chipaca> 0.05user 0.00system 0:00.06elapsed 98%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 11216maxresident)k | |
| [10:51] <jam> 50-60ms ? | |
| [10:52] <Chipaca> yep | |
| [10:52] <Chipaca> and 11MB | |
| [10:54] <facundo__> Muy buenos días a todos! | |
| === facundo__ is now known as facubatista | |
| [10:55] <Chipaca> jam: of course that's slower in great part because my cpu aggressively freqs down; if i pin it hot it drops to 30ms | |
| [10:55] <Chipaca> and if i were to enable 'turbo' mode it'd probably drop another ~5ms | |
| [10:55] <Chipaca> but i don't like my fans being on loud all the time =) | |
| [10:56] <Chipaca> facubatista: muyy buen día su señoría mantantirulirulá | |
| [10:57] <facubatista> Chipaca, supercalifragilísticoespialidosas mañanas! | |
| [11:26] <jam> Chipaca, thinking about Ajduk... It came to light that Operators can trigger an action to be run, which means the Operator charm *should* be able to cause a script to run in the application container | |
| [11:27] <jam> Chipaca, https://discourse.juju.is/t/coordinating-actions-for-a-k8s-operators/3161/2 | |
| [11:30] <jam> Chipaca, I added a comment to the doc | |
| [11:31] <facubatista> Chipaca, https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/42 | |
| [11:41] <jam> Chipaca, facubatista : all wired up! turns out we aren't very good at cleaning up after ourselves: | |
| [11:41] <jam> $ juju run --unit uo/2 'state-get' | |
| [11:41] <jam> '#notices#': | | |
| [11:41] <jam> [] | |
| [11:41] <jam> StoredStateData[_stored]: | | |
| [11:41] <jam> {event_count: 12} | |
| [11:41] <jam> Ubuntu/on/config_changed[7]: | | |
| [11:41] <jam> null | |
| [11:41] <jam> ... | |
| [11:41] <jam> Ubuntu/on/install[1]: | | |
| [11:41] <jam> null | |
| [11:41] <jam> ... | |
| [11:41] <jam> Ubuntu/on/leader_elected[4]: | | |
| [11:41] <jam> null | |
| [11:41] <jam> ... | |
| [11:41] <jam> on/commit[3]: | | |
| [11:41] <jam> null | |
| [11:41] <jam> ... | |
| [11:41] <jam> on/commit[6]: | | |
| [11:41] <jam> null | |
| [11:41] <jam> ... | |
| [11:41] <jam> on/commit[9]: | | |
| [11:41] <jam> null | |
| [11:41] <jam> ... | |
| [11:41] <jam> on/commit[12]: | | |
| [11:41] <jam> null | |
| [11:42] <jam> ... | |
| [11:42] <jam> on/pre_commit[2]: | | |
| [11:42] <jam> null | |
| [11:42] <jam> ... | |
| [11:42] <jam> on/pre_commit[5]: | | |
| [11:42] <jam> null | |
| [11:42] <jam> ... | |
| [11:42] <jam> on/pre_commit[8]: | | |
| [11:42] <jam> null | |
| [11:42] <jam> ... | |
| [11:42] <jam> on/pre_commit[11]: | | |
| [11:42] <jam> null | |
| [11:42] <jam> https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/NWZy54VMk4/ | |
| [11:42] <jam> (didn't mean to paste the content here) | |
| [11:42] <facubatista> :) | |
| [11:51] <Chipaca> i'll be 10 minutes late for the revue | |
| [11:51] <Chipaca> (small lunch chaos here) | |
| [11:51] <jam> Chipaca, facubatista so the bug is that events that have no handlers are always treated as deferred | |
| [11:52] <facubatista> oh | |
| [11:55] * facubatista plans the meeting for 10' past normal time | |
| [12:12] <Chipaca> jam: that's a nasty bug :-| | |
| [12:13] <facubatista> Chipaca, https://discourse.juju.is/t/how-to-build-a-charm-using-modern-tools/3246 | |
| [12:23] <mup> Issue operator#333 opened: Events with no observers never get deleted <Created by jameinel> <https://github.com/canonical/operator/issues/333> | |
| [13:07] <Chipaca> what's the generic name for what 'juju deploy' deploys to? | |
| [13:13] <facubatista> Chipaca, the "backing cloud"? | |
| [13:14] <Chipaca> facubatista: hmm | |
| [13:14] <Chipaca> facubatista: in the end i rewrote the sentence to not need it, fwiw | |
| [13:14] <Chipaca> facubatista: https://discourse.juju.is/t/what-files-would-you-expect-charmcraft-build-copies-into-the-charm/3247 | |
| [13:14] <Chipaca> stub: mthaddon: ^ if you have opinions on it please speak up :) | |
| [13:38] <mthaddon> ack, will try and take a look soon | |
| [14:14] <mup> PR operator#334 opened: Unobserved events <Created by jameinel> <https://github.com/canonical/operator/pull/334> | |
| [14:15] <jam> Chipaca, PRs should be up for review | |
| [14:15] <jam> facubatista, review of charmcraft is up | |
| [14:15] <facubatista> jam, thanks | |
| [14:15] <Chipaca> jam: which are the python implementations of state-set that are slow? where can i play with that? | |
| [14:17] <Chipaca> s/set/[sg]et/ fwiw | |
| [14:18] <facubatista> jam, what do you mean with "make it contextual"? | |
| [14:19] <Chipaca> facubatista: pass it around either explicitly or implicity, i think | |
| [14:23] <facubatista> it could be done | |
| [14:24] <facubatista> I like it how it's now, though, as it should be an omnipresent object, the only interaction with the module, etc | |
| [15:08] <jam> Chipaca, https://github.com/canonical/operator/pull/323/files#diff-54d96dff01765335f1f08f6254aa0de6R197-R250 is the python backend | |
| [15:08] <mup> PR #323: 317 state get <Created by jameinel> <https://github.com/canonical/operator/pull/323> | |
| [15:08] <jam> facubatista, yeah, the idea was 'is it worth passing one around' rather than being used as a process global | |
| [15:14] <Chipaca> heh, silly me was looking for #! :) | |
| [15:40] <jam> Chipaca, yeah, the #! is fixed to be bash by fake_script | |
| [16:03] <mup> PR operator#335 opened: make tests 15% faster <Created by chipaca> <https://github.com/canonical/operator/pull/335> | |
| [16:04] <Chipaca> :-D | |
| [16:33] <Chipaca> tomorrow is RTD DAY \o/ | |
| [16:57] <Chipaca> ok, i think i'm at eod, mostly | |
| [16:58] <Chipaca> facubatista: i'm still hoping to finish the review on charmcraft#33 tonight though | |
| [16:58] <mup> PR charmcraft#33: Refactored all the message sending to the user, including storing everything in a file <Created by facundobatista> <https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/33> | |
| [16:58] <Chipaca> but that'll depend on external factors :) | |
| [17:00] <facubatista> Chipaca, tomorrow is fine, too | |
| [20:25] <mup> PR operator#335 closed: make tests 15% faster <Created by chipaca> <Merged by chipaca> <https://github.com/canonical/operator/pull/335> | |