Unit state during charm upgrade

Gary Poster gary.poster at canonical.com
Mon Mar 5 17:53:48 UTC 2012

On 03/05/12 12:51, Clint Byrum wrote:
> Excerpts from Gary Poster's message of Mon Mar 05 08:27:11 -0800 2012:
>> On 03/05/12 11:22, Benji York wrote:
>>> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Gary Poster<gary.poster at canonical.com>   wrote:
>>>> With Francesco's proposed change, the test does this.
>>>> - start upgrade
>>>> - loop until the status is no longer "updating".  If we never see the
>>>> "updating" status that's fine: it must have been a fast update, but now we
>>>> know we are ready to test the result of the update.
>>> The above would work as long as the command to start the upgrade doesn't
>>> return until the state transition from "running" to "updating" takes
>>> place.  In other words, this sequence of events should not be possible:
>>> - upgrade is initiated
>>> - juju status shows "running"
>>> - juju status shows "upgrading"
>>> - juju status shows "running"
>> Agreed.  Another alternative is that the version number does not change
>> until the "upgrading" status displays; then we can check for the new
>> version number&  "running".  Only slightly more to do in the test loop.
> I think the only logical thing is to display the charm version that is
> actually running, and the new charm is not actually running until after
> upgrade-charm has been executed and completed.

That would be great by us.



More information about the Juju mailing list