High Availability command line interface - future plans.

[Tim Penhey]

On 09/11/13 03:04, roger peppe wrote:
> On 8 November 2013 13:51, Gustavo Niemeyer <gustavo at niemeyer.net> wrote:
>> juju add-state-server --api-only-please-thanks
> 
> And if we want to allow a machine that runs the environment-manager
> workers but not the api server or mongo server (not actually an unlikely thing
> given certain future possibilities) then add-state-server is a command that
> doesn't necessarily add a state server at all... That thought
> was the source of my doubt.

I think that it is reasonable to think of just the db and the api server
from the user's point of view.

The fact that we may run other workers along side the api server is up
to us, and not something we actually need to expose to people.

Most of our users should have no problem at all understanding juju:db
and juju:api (or whatever names we call them).

> That said, it's just a spelling. If there's general agreement on "state-server",
> so be it - I'm very happy to move forward with that.

I cringe whenever I see "state" used anywhere.

I would like use to move towards namespaced services with a common
understanding, but I'm happy to have that significantly down the line.

Just remember that whatever command we come up with, it needs to be
easily explained to our new users.  I like the idea of a special command
that handles the HA-ness of juju, because it means we can give
meaningful error messages when people do things not quite right (like
adding just one more mongo db thinking it is enough).

I don't have the will to bike-shed around the actual command we use,
however I strongly suggest that we go with something that makes sense to
Jorge and Marco (and to our CTS folks) as they are our people on the
ground, using this tool.

Cheers,
Tim