On 05/09/16 03:12, Ian Booth wrote:
> Currently, we would report the number of models as 2 and the number of
> machines as 7 because the 3 machines used to run the controllers
> themselves are excluded from the count. That seems ok I think?
No. I specifically want us to start reflecting the juju software in the
status output in the 'controller' model.
That means showing which is the leader unit, showing how many machines
are used, and showing status and messages.
> The interesting bit is if a controller machine has had a unit deployed
> to the controller model and placed on the controller machine itself
> using --to. Then we should probably expect the machine count to include
> that controller machine as well, but it doesn't currently.
Exactly - think about it the way I am guiding you (juju is software that
should show in the model) and that problem disappears.
> As an aside, what we should do for show-controller (the yaml/json
> output) is add fields to show the HA status of that controller.
On 05/09/16 03:12, Ian Booth wrote:
> Currently, we would report the number of models as 2 and the number of
> machines as 7 because the 3 machines used to run the controllers
> themselves are excluded from the count. That seems ok I think?
No. I specifically want us to start reflecting the juju software in the
status output in the 'controller' model.
That means showing which is the leader unit, showing how many machines
are used, and showing status and messages.
> The interesting bit is if a controller machine has had a unit deployed
> to the controller model and placed on the controller machine itself
> using --to. Then we should probably expect the machine count to include
> that controller machine as well, but it doesn't currently.
Exactly - think about it the way I am guiding you (juju is software that
should show in the model) and that problem disappears.
> As an aside, what we should do for show-controller (the yaml/json
> output) is add fields to show the HA status of that controller.
Agreed.
Mark