I think if OW SDK, and sequences/compositions, propagate X-Request-Id header (using the existing transaction id/X-Request-Id), the parent is not needed? i.e. there may be 2 parts to this effort: - expose the transaction id to runtime container - propagate the transaction id in requests initiated from runtime container/controller
On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 10:38 AM Rodric Rabbah <rod...@gmail.com> wrote: > In general yes but I think generally do you need the transaction id or the > parent id for an activation? > > This issue is relevant - https://github.com/apache/openwhisk/issues/3083. > I also recall in the early days of the composer, we wanted a way to query > parent/child activations but this requires new couch views and we didn't > pursue it. > > > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 1:20 PM Chetan Mehrotra <chetan.mehro...@gmail.com > > > wrote: > > > Currently we pass the `activation_id` as part of `/run` call to any > > action runtime [1]. Would it be fine to also pass the `TransactionId` > > such that it can be accessed by action code? > > > > One usecase of this would be to enable tracing a sequence/composition > > by linking all activations which are part of same transaction in > > epsagon [2] > > > > Chetan Mehrotra > > [1] > > > https://github.com/apache/openwhisk/blob/master/docs/actions-new.md#activation > > [2] > > > https://epsagon.com/blog/epsagon-makes-troubleshooting-apache-openwhisk-a-snap/ > > >
