[00:10] babbageclunk: is it true we hard code leases auto expire to false? did we have plans to change that? if auto expire is always false, then we can remove more code? [00:10] wallyworld: ? not sure what you mean [00:11] / Autoexpire is part of the lease.Store interface. [00:11] func (*store) Autoexpire() bool { return false } [00:11] controls how the worker expires leases [00:11] whether it does it on the next tick or if a client call i needed [00:12] Ah - right! Yes, I'll remove that - it's because the db leases needed to be expired, but the raft ones get expired on clock tick [00:12] thanks for the reminder! [00:12] babbageclunk: np, but for raft, if it is done automatically, wouldn't auto expire be true? [00:15] it is [00:15] I mean, I'll remove the code in lease manager that does stuff when !autoexpire [00:15] but it's hard coded false? [00:16] in the non-raft store [00:16] ah, ok, i was looking at the wrong one [00:16] duh [00:16] yup yup [00:46] babbageclunk: you can also remove ExpireLease() right? and reduce code in provider dummyLeaseStore, or even remove that entirely [00:47] yeah, that was what I was planning [01:04] https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/11582 for someone [01:05] backporting develop fix to 2.8 [01:05] should really have landed in 2.7, but I don't think it is worthwhile going that far back now [01:19] lgtm [01:19] thumper: wanna land in 2.8-rc though [01:20] that will get forward ported today later [01:20] wallyworld: ok [01:42] wallyworld: hpidcock could any of you take a look this PR https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/11583 for fixing upgrade-charm? ty [01:43] sure [01:48] wallyworld, hpidcock, kelvinliu, tlm: do any of you have any running k8s models that have been upgraded from earlier versions? [01:48] * thumper wants to test a theory [01:55] not currently [02:04] kelvinliu: +1 but with a request to fix the RemoteInitFunc signature to remove runningStatus. the cahce cleanup can happen later, but will be nioce to have the func clean [02:08] wallyworld: we still need get the pod name from the status, or we can change the status from podName string. or do u think we can change it later when we decide the remove the status entirely? [02:09] typo, change the status to podName string [02:09] thumper: I don't [02:09] kelvinliu: ah right, i missed that, sure [02:09] wallyworld: cooking with gas when you're ready [02:10] tlm: looking [02:12] wallyworld: I think we just need to test for upgrading different workload type - stateless, stateful, daemon, but probably no need to test different k8s cloud, agree? [02:13] we should at some point but can be microk8s for now i think [02:15] tlm: SetPasswords() also needs changing to be an api that takes just the password. it can internally create the params.EntityPassword since we use a pluggin at the back end, but the api called should just pass in a single password [02:15] and result.OneError() [02:15] func sig just returns a single error, not ErrorResults [02:17] tlm: also, i added tag 2.0.1 to juju/description [02:22] i left comments in the pr [02:23] wallyworld: cheers doing now [02:50] gah, can't remove leasesC - we can't run transactions against an unknown collection. [02:50] wallyworld: ^ [02:50] which txns? [02:50] the ones in MigrateLeasesToGlobalTime [02:51] can we chck if the collection exists before running hte upgrade step logic [02:51] if the collection is not there, no need to migrate anything [02:52] yes, but it needs to be in allcollections, otherwise running a transaction fails [02:52] point me at the code that fails? [02:53] the collection will be there in older dbs right [02:53] and we run the upgrade step on that existing collection [02:54] wallyworld: state/upgrades.go:1293 [02:54] babbageclunk: right, so that the top of the method we check if the collection exists [02:55] if it doesn't nothong to do [02:55] it's not the existence of the collection - it's the entry in allCollections [02:55] HO? [02:56] Otherwise the tests (and the upgrade step) fail with forbidden transaction: references unknown collection "leases" [02:56] sure, in stdup [03:08] jjkkjj [03:18] wallyworld: got 5 minutes for HO ? [03:19] https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/11584 - cleanup for some future work [03:20] tlm: sure [03:23] thumper: lgtm [03:46] hpidcock: thanks [03:46] https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/11585 - for a bug that had been assigned to me for over a year [03:46] or two [03:47] lgtm [03:48] hpidcock: thanks again [03:57] hey wallyworld you didn't push a tag for juju/description [03:57] still have it? Not sure I have push access to that repo [03:57] ah, it was addd to the branch for which i created a PR [03:57] i'll add [03:57] ta [03:58] tlm: try now [04:01] works cheers wallyworld [04:03] wallyworld: I think go mod wants tags in the form of v2.0.1 hpidcock can you confirm ? [04:03] tlm depends on the package [04:03] tlm: the previous tag was 2.0.0 [04:06] hmmm go mod is not liking life [04:07] tlm: i added v2.0.1 [04:07] does that help? [04:08] changed the error but hasn't helped [04:08] will dig into it [04:09] can you remove the v tag wallyworld ? [04:09] ok [04:12] done [04:32] babbageclunk: you also removing store.Refresh() ? [05:17] tlm: looks good after the go.mod issue is sorted [05:18] wallyworld: go.mod issue should be sorted now [05:18] ? [05:18] tlm: ah ok, sorry i was probably looking at an outdated diff [05:26] wallyworld: yeah, I will - just working out how I can make the dummy store do autoexpiry [05:27] ah joy [05:27] babbageclunk: i have the unit->dead revocation fully working :-D [05:27] ooh nice [05:30] kelvinliu: tlm: so i think your stuff is good to go; i have release notes organised; as soon as things land wash through jenkins, i'll kick off rc2. any issues i'm missing? [05:31] wallyworld: ho? [05:31] ok [05:41] hpidcock: you free to jump into standup? [05:47] wallyworld: sure [06:07] hpidcock: kelvinliu: sorry, hit button too soon [06:07] nws [06:07] wallyworld: sure [06:19] wallyworld: hey, I'm just going to hit merge on my pr so yours doesn't need to hold up - I can always put the extra store tidy-ups in after. [06:19] that was poorly worded but I think you can probably see what I'm getting at [06:20] babbageclunk: whoohoo, tyvm [08:21] manadart: I have landed the []InterfaceInfo -> InterfaceInfos PR on 2.8 and dev; make sure to rebase if working with those types to avoid conflicts [08:21] achilleasa: Yep, rebased already. [08:26] manadart: have a question on 11579 [08:27] achilleasa: HO? [08:27] omw [09:21] achilleasa: Pushed change and replied to your comment. [09:21] looking [11:00] achilleasa: Simple one: https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/11587 [11:10] achilleasa: Thanks. Also need a tick on this backport of the earlier one: https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/11588 [11:10] manadart: done [11:11] achilleasa: Ta. [13:29] achilleasa: Trivial forward-merge https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/11589. [13:39] manadart: trade you for https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/11590 [13:40] achilleasa: Deal. === narindergupta is now known as narinderguptamac === grumble is now known as rawr