Ok, I see the problem. I'll ty to make it more clear:
- with "action log" I mean the output of action invocations that is logged
for the users (stored in the userlogs-XXXX.log files of the invokers and
controllers (for action sequences)
- with "activation json" I mean the json document for an activation like
this:
{
"activationId": "5a2b19119c574ce7ab19119c572ce730",
"annotations": [
{
"key": "path",
"value": "ruediger.ma...@de.ibm.com_MySpaceUS1/compileError"
},
...etc ....
],
"duration": 451,
"end": 1567721624876,
"logs": [], // no log lines in this case
"name": "compileError",
"namespace": "ruediger.ma...@de.ibm.com_MySpaceUS1",
"publish": false,
"response": {
"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)"
},
"status": "action developer error",
"success": false
},
"start": 1567721624425,
"subject": "ruediger.ma...@de.ibm.com",
"version": "0.0.1"
}
- We do not want to change the activation json. We want to change the
output to the action log that is produced from the activation json.
- one activation json produces one line in the action log of type
'activation_record' and n lines of type 'user_log', one user_log line per
output line that is printed by the action. The user_log lines are stored
in the 'logs' field of the activation json. This would be the output in
the action log for the above mentioned invocation:
1 line of type action_record and 0 lines of type user_log, I formatted the
one line for better readability:
{"activationId":"68484f5c911d412b884f5c911df12b45",
"duration":498,
"end":1567785044285,
...etc. ...
// here's the result from above we do not want to be suppressed:
"message":"{\"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)\"}",
"name":"compileError",
"namespace":"ruediger.ma...@de.ibm.com_MySpaceUS1",
"path":"ruediger.ma...@de.ibm.com_MySpaceUS1/compileError",
"response":{
"status":"action developer error",
"success":false
},
"type":"activation_record",
... and some more fields...
}
- We want to achieve that the 'result' field in the activation json is not
suppressed in the error case (success=false) and printed out to the action
log so that the user can find more information in the action log about the
error. But we do not want the 'result' field content be part in the action
log if an activation succeeds (success=true). As already said, this is
just one example and other strategies for adding/suppressing results may
be applicable that also cannot be solved with a simple flag from outside
(by an annotation or a system configuration flag). The small change we
request does not change the behavior of OpenWhisk and avoids a hard-coded
strategy.
Requested PR is https://github.com/apache/openwhisk/pull/4604
Thanks, Ruediger
From: Rodric Rabbah <rod...@gmail.com>
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Date: 06/09/2019 02:05
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Allow decision about action result
inclusion in logs on a per call basis
I think it?s not clear to me when you say ?log?.
The activation record has a log field and a result field. Are you trying
to add error logs to the result field?
At first I thought you meant you wanted to omit the result field from the
activation record except during errors. But I think I misunderstood.
Maybe an example will be helpful.
-r
> On Sep 5, 2019, at 7:31 PM, Ruediger Maass <ruediger.ma...@de.ibm.com>
wrote:
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
