Regardless of the outcome of the bug, the proper syntax for accessing units is as follows:
self.d.sentry["ibm-mobilefirst-server"][0] This is because, our new testing environment and soon to be normal testing procedure for all charms while we wait for multi-model environments recycles the environment and also incurs this increase. Either way, hard-coded unit values tend to be fragile in general. This will do a look up and always return the first unit. The previous hard-coded examples in documentation are being updated to reflect this, I didn't realize how many bad examples I'd produced over the years :) Marco On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 10:55 AM Matthew Williams < matthew.willi...@canonical.com> wrote: > Hi Sunitha, > > The bug is closed, it was fixed and released in juju 1.25. > > There are some docs at the below link that summarise the behaviour: > > https://jujucharms.com/docs/1.25/reference-numbering > > If you'd like to have a talk about this I'd be very happy to. I'm mattyw > on irc in #juju and #juju-dev (otherwise email is fine) > > Thanks > > Matty > > > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 3:49 PM, Sunitha Radharapu <sradh...@in.ibm.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Matt, >> >> I am a little bit confused here, bug description says it should be as >> unique id. If it is a bug and you are going to fix in future juju releases >> then we no need to change our amulet tests. >> >> If it is a new feature then we will change our upcoming charms >> accordingly, >> >> Thanks, >> Sunitha. >> >> >> >> >> [image: Inactive hide details for Matthew Williams ---13-11-2015 >> 20:32:45---Hi Mark, Sunitha, My apologies, I should have included the]Matthew >> Williams ---13-11-2015 20:32:45---Hi Mark, Sunitha, My apologies, I should >> have included the explanation in the original email. >> >> From: Matthew Williams <matthew.willi...@canonical.com> >> To: Mark Shuttleworth <m...@ubuntu.com> >> Cc: Sunitha Radharapu/India/IBM@IBMIN, Juju email list < >> juju@lists.ubuntu.com> >> Date: 13-11-2015 20:32 >> Subject: Re: Unit number is increasing in latest juju version. >> ------------------------------ >> > Hi Mark, Sunitha, >> >> My apologies, I should have included the explanation in the original >> email. >> >> This was a change to address a long standing bug: >> *https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1174610* >> <https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1174610> >> >> There's a discussion in the bug report, but the summary is that in most >> cases it's desirable to have the unit id be unique across the life of an >> environment. Otherwise you loose the identity of a unit across relations. >> >> We were already numbering the machines in the same way, so this change >> also gives us consistency between machine and unit numbering systems. >> >> Thanks >> >> Matty >> >> On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 1:50 PM, Mark Shuttleworth <*m...@ubuntu.com* >> <m...@ubuntu.com>> wrote: >> >> >> Thanks Sunitha. Matty, deeper question is - was this an intended >> change >> in behaviour, and what's the rationale? >> >> Mark >> >> >> >> -- > Juju mailing list > Juju@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju >
-- Juju mailing list Juju@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
