Hi there,
may I ask for comments? Annotations for the decision whether results
should be added in the action log or not would not fix the problem we try
to solve and is a different, independent question.
We want to add error information in the log but not print results in the
good (i.e., success) case. This can only be done if one inspects the
activation 'success' field (or the 'error' field in the result) and in
this case log the result that contains the error information. We could
hard-code a strategy in `ActivationFileStorage`. But this has the
disadvantage that it would change the default behavior of OpenWhisk and
not everyone might like this and may have different opinions about the
"right" strategy. Therefore we propose the more flexible way of
introducing a flag, let anyone decide on the right strategy, and not
hard-coding a strategy. In the default case, there would be no behavioral
change of OpenWhisk with the flag, i.e. no one needs to care about the
flag if not wanted. But it would help us and maybe others to solve the
described problem.
Thanks, Ruediger
From: Ruediger Maass/Germany/IBM
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Date: 04/09/2019 11:07
Subject: Re: Allow decision about action result inclusion in logs
on a per call basis
Let me please add the information that the behavior of OpenWhisk is not
changed by this fix. The provided feature must be actively chosen.
Thanks, Ruediger
From: "Ruediger Maass" <ruediger.ma...@de.ibm.com>
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Date: 04/09/2019 10:42
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Allow decision about action result
inclusion in logs on a per call basis
Thanks for the discussion!
This PR is only about suppressing results in action logs. If a user still
wants to have the result in the action log then he or she can simply add a
log statement in the action for that. Why should we introduce a new
mechanism for this like an annotation for automatically adding the result
to the log (or not)? Seems complicated.
In our specific case we need the flag per invocation because we want to
the add the result in error cases. For example: main is not defined,
compile error in action, etc. see below:
1) no main() in js
"result": {
"error": "Initialization has failed due to: ReferenceError:
main is not defined\n
at eval (eval at <anonymous>
(/nodejsAction/runner.js:79:109), <anonymous>:8:8)\n
at eval (eval at <anonymous>
(/nodejsAction/runner.js:79:109), <anonymous>:8:14)\n
at NodeActionRunner.init (/nodejsAction/runner.js:79:45)\n
at doInit (/nodejsAction/src/service.js:142:31)\n
at initCode (/nodejsAction/src/service.js:81:24)\n
at /nodejsAction/app.js:69:13\n
at Layer.handle [as handle_request]
(/node_modules/express/lib/router/layer.js:95:5)\n
at next
(/node_modules/express/lib/router/route.js:131:13)\n
at Route.dispatch
(/node_modules/express/lib/router/route.js:112:3)\n
at Layer.handle [as handle_request]
(/node_modules/express/lib/router/layer.js:95:5)"
2) compile Error
"result": {
"error": "Initialization has failed due to: SyntaxError:
Unexpected identifier\n
at NodeActionRunner.init
(/nodejsAction/runner.js:79:109)\n
at doInit (/nodejsAction/src/service.js:142:31)\n
at initCode (/nodejsAction/src/service.js:81:24)\n
at /nodejsAction/app.js:69:13\n
at Layer.handle [as handle_request]
(/node_modules/express/lib/router/layer.js:95:5)\n
at next
(/node_modules/express/lib/router/route.js:131:13)\n
at Route.dispatch
(/node_modules/express/lib/router/route.js:112:3)\n
at Layer.handle [as handle_request]
(/node_modules/express/lib/router/layer.js:95:5)\n
at /node_modules/express/lib/router/index.js:277:22\n
at Function.process_params
(/node_modules/express/lib/router/index.js:330:12)"
This kind of information cannot be logged anywhere else and does not
contain sensible information. It is very helpful information for the
customer to correct the action. So we do not want to suppress this
information.
From: James Thomas <jthomas...@gmail.com>
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Date: 03/09/2019 15:24
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Allow decision about action result
inclusion in logs on a per call basis
This is a sensible change and I agree with what Rodric has suggested:
can we make this a per-action annotation?
On Tue, 3 Sep 2019 at 13:28, Rodric Rabbah <rod...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Action results may contain sensible data that should not be logged.
>
> I interpret this to mean: not stored in the activation record.
>
> If this is what you mean, why not make this a feature controlled per
action
> using an annotation and let the user decide: ok to save the result, not
ok
> to save the result, only save the result on error.
>
> -r
>
> On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 8:17 AM Ruediger Maass
<ruediger.ma...@de.ibm.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Action results may contain sensible data that should not be logged.
There
> > is a system configuration flag (writeResultToFile) that can be used to
> > switch on or off the result inclusion in logs. But this is a global
switch
> > that holds for all activations. In our case we want to able to decide
per
> > activation whether or not the result should be included in the log or
not.
> > In our special case we want results to be included in case of errors
(in
> > other words, our predicate function for the decision is: 'Does the
result
> > contain an error field?'). But also other decision logic may be
> > applicable.
> >
> > This PR
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_apache_openwhisk_pull_4604&d=DwIBaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=X0kuppcoBkurjGK5dhY1vViAOVizrmBkK-unFKRbRys&m=Omwt2ZmfdyerpXiU-HbIwPEvr7znKYAA4DFFhJiyk28&s=3z4nZkA573qZvgihbr448hMHPhnIC4zy7Y8MeuAENU0&e=
is a small change
> > that extends ActivationFileStorage.
> >
> > Please help and comment on the PR.
> >
> > Thank you, Ruediger
> >
> >
--
Regards,
James Thomas
