Re: Config runtime

[Tyson Norris]

Hi - 
I would rather see this as an automated + configurable feature, rather than an 
API that is manually invoked with a user making (possibly bad) decisions.
I created an issue to describe this here 
https://github.com/apache/openwhisk/issues/4725

Part of the reason for automating this, is that in addition to having a deficit 
of prewarms, we also experience problems related to having a surplus of 
prewarms, and in case of blackbox dedicated invokers, this can be a problem 
where those prewarms are never used, and just waste resources. If there was an 
automated way to scale down the unused prewarms, this resource usage would be 
temporary.

Thanks
Tyson

On 1/6/20, 7:29 PM, "甯尤刚" <ning.youg...@navercorp.com> wrote:

    Hello Everyone：
    ​
    I submited a WIP patch: 
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Fopenwhisk%2Fpull%2F4790&amp;data=02%7C01%7Ctnorris%40adobe.com%7Cea533f3198ec4ae74afb08d79321db99%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C1%7C637139645952054275&amp;sdata=X1FxwSYDXGIMBz8oltz0uUHz9mEXPSabek9sALTnloc%3D&amp;reserved=0
 here
    ​
    Sometimes, admin may want to reinitalize the runtime config, e.g. nodejs:10 
prewarm container number is less, lead to cold start, in order to handle user's 
request as soon as possible,
    admin may want to reinitalize the runtime configuration to increase the 
nodejs:10 prewarm containers.
    And admin may want to reinitalize the runtime config on some limited 
invokers
    ​
    Currently, just finish its basic functions and worked well in my local, but 
didn't add test cases then.
    If the direction of this patch is ok, i will finish its corresponding test 
cases
    ​
    Best Regards,
    ning.yougang
    ​
    ​