Hello Andrew, I ran into a problem when Juju was no longer calling "apt-get update". I filed bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1336353
The problem appears to be the apt metadata was out of date and the charms that call "apt-get install ..." in the install hook fail. We also saw this problem on a different system where the cloud image was out of date and the install hook failed because no apt-get update was run. Not calling apt-get update will break a large number of existing charms and needs to be fixed. It looks like we have 2 problems: 1) Juju should provide a way to turn on or off the apt-get update. I would suggest an environment variable to enable or disable "apt-get update". 2) Juju does not manage the local cloud image found in /var/cache/lxc/cloud-<series>/ directory. The image I was using was older (05/28/2014) and that is why the apt-get meta data was out of date. Not quite sure how to solve this, someone suggested a cron job to download the lastest cloud image in the background. Someone else mentioned this is a security issue if the stale image does not have a patch and is not updated we could have an issue. This is not the experience we want to give to Juju users. As developers we should be able to turn off apt-get update for our own development purposes, but leave it on so existing charms work. I am willing to help resolve these two problems. Please reach out to mbruzek on irc or email me directly. Thanks, - Matt Bruzek <matthew.bru...@canonical.com> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 8:05 AM, Andrew Wilkins < andrew.wilk...@canonical.com> wrote: > Hi folks, > > I've been debugging a bootstrap bug [0] that was caused by ssh timing out > (and the client not noticing), which was caused by "apt-get upgrade" taking > an awfully long time (6 minutes on Azure). > [0] https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1316185 > > I just filed https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1335822, and did a > quick and dirty hack that brought the upgrade down to 3 minutes on Azure. I > don't know the variance, so I can't be sure that it's all due to eatmydata, > but smoser's results are similar. > > Even with eatmydata, a full bootstrap on Azure just took me 10 minutes. > That's roughly broken down into: > - apt-get update: 20s > - apt-get upgrade: 3m20s > - apt-get install <various>: 10s > - Download tools (from shared Azure storage account): 5s > - jujud bootstrap: 1m50s > > We could bring the 10m down to 6m40s. Still not brilliant, but > considerably better IMO. > > I propose that we remove the "apt-get upgrade" altogether. Cloud images > are regularly updated and tested, and I think we should be able to rely on > that alone. If users want something more up-to-date, they can use the daily > images which are not tested as a whole, but are composed of SRUs, which is > effectively what users get today. > > Cheers, > Andrew > > -- > 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
