state/api: fixes to parallel api.Open

state/api: fixes to parallel api.Open

With these changes, api.Open will now
do the right thing if one of the dialers
succeeds before all are started. We also
introduce a short delay between starting
dialers, to avoid unnecessary dial
attempts.

https://code.launchpad.net/~axwalk/juju-core/apiclient-open-parallel-fixes/+merge/213569

(do not edit description out of merge proposal)

[axw, 2014-04-01 03:23:58]

Please take a look.

[fwereade, 2014-04-01 07:14:36]

LGTM

https://codereview.appspot.com/82900045/diff/1/state/api/apiclient_test.go
File state/api/apiclient_test.go (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/82900045/diff/1/state/api/apiclient_test.go#ne...
state/api/apiclient_test.go:79: c.Assert(err, gc.ErrorMatches, `timed out
connecting to "wss://.*/"`)
much nicer, thanks

[rog, 2014-04-01 07:42:07]

LGTM, thanks

https://codereview.appspot.com/82900045/diff/1/state/api/apiclient.go
File state/api/apiclient.go (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/82900045/diff/1/state/api/apiclient.go#newcode126
state/api/apiclient.go:126: } else if err != nil {
s/else//

https://codereview.appspot.com/82900045/diff/1/state/api/apiclient.go#newcode199
state/api/apiclient.go:199: logger.Debugf("error dialing API server, will retry:
%v", err)
perhaps include the cfg.Location here, otherwise when we've got a few of these
happening concurrently, we won't be able to tell which address is giving which
error.

[axw, 2014-04-01 07:54:08]

Please take a look.

https://codereview.appspot.com/82900045/diff/1/state/api/apiclient.go
File state/api/apiclient.go (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/82900045/diff/1/state/api/apiclient.go#newcode126
state/api/apiclient.go:126: } else if err != nil {
On 2014/04/01 07:42:07, rog wrote:
> s/else//

Done.

https://codereview.appspot.com/82900045/diff/1/state/api/apiclient.go#newcode199
state/api/apiclient.go:199: logger.Debugf("error dialing API server, will retry:
%v", err)
On 2014/04/01 07:42:07, rog wrote:
> perhaps include the cfg.Location here, otherwise when we've got a few of these
> happening concurrently, we won't be able to tell which address is giving which
> error.

Done.