What you're describing sounds a lot like what Jenkins does for user input steps in a build. A stateful task manager is required to do this as you've been exploring. For debugging purposes, do you think it may be simpler to write a dedicated service around this, or would a more serverless approach be that straightforward? I'm not very clear on the implementation details myself, so this is sort of spitballing here.
On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 at 10:10, Bertrand Delacretaz <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > Thank you everybody for you replies. > > I understand implementing this directly in OpenWhisk is challenging, > and especially this comment from Olivier: > > On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 6:12 PM Olivier Tardieu <[email protected]> wrote: > > ...Alternatively, the dynamic creation of trigger-like and rule-like things > > can be pushed to an external system outside of OpenWhisk. This > > addresses issue number 2 and can also help with 1... > > makes me think that it's worth looking at how a distinct "state > machine service" can help with that, rather than making complex > changes to OpenWhisk itself. > > Maybe that service can be a set of OpenWhisk Actions...that would > avoid having to deploy additional services (outside of states > persistence) while not having to make core changes. At the cost of > some performance probably, but if it's about slow human-driven or > batch processing workflows that might not be a real problem. > > I'll think about a minimal prototype that would demonstrate that and > share it here if I succeed. > > -Bertrand -- Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
