Both of these assumptions are incorrect. Please do not assume there's a single person managing an environment, and the fact the sequence is generated outside of the transaction that adds the action is a proof that actions will be arbitrarily executed rather than in the sequence suggested by the numbers.
On Fri Oct 24 2014 at 4:21:30 PM John Weldon <johnweld...@gmail.com> wrote: > Forgot to reply-all > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: John Weldon <johnweld...@gmail.com> > Date: Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 11:19 AM > Subject: Re: Actions :: UUID vs. Tag on command line > To: Gustavo Niemeyer <gustavo.nieme...@canonical.com> > > > > On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 11:14 AM, Gustavo Niemeyer < > gustavo.nieme...@canonical.com> wrote: > >> I doubt this would work. There's no way in the transaction package for >> you to generate an id and reference that same id in other fields in one go. >> >> In other cases that's not an issue, but having a sequence of numbered >> actions where 10 is applied before 9 would be awkward. >> > > > Interesting. > > 1. The sequence is generated in a separate transaction before being used. > (state/sequence.go) So I don't think your concern about obtaining and > using in one transaction will be an issue. > 2. We have not had much discussion around strict ordering of actions being > run in the order they were queued. My impression is that two different > users interacting with the system at the same time is a bit of an edge case. > > -- > John Weldon > > -- > Juju-dev mailing list > Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/ > mailman/listinfo/juju-dev >
-- Juju-dev mailing list Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
