2020-04-01 01:34:52 UTC - Saahitya E: No, like what is the transactionId for an 
invocation(activationId)?
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585704892027800
----
2020-04-01 01:38:41 UTC - Jiang PengCheng: the transactionId is not stored in 
to database, so seems impossible except get it from logs
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585705121028500
----
2020-04-01 02:09:04 UTC - Rodric Rabbah: we should maybe store it. Or instead 
of returning code as transaction id, return the activation is instead where 
applicable (invoke). 
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585706944030000
----
2020-04-01 02:11:15 UTC - Jiang PengCheng: what can we do with a transactionId 
except tracing invocation path in logs?
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585707075030900
----
2020-04-01 02:57:01 UTC - Brendan Doyle: What was the reasoning behind changing 
the `CompletionMessage` ack format to no longer include the status code of the 
activation for non-blocking activations?
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585709821032200?thread_ts=1585709821.032200&cid=C3TPCAQG1
----
2020-04-01 03:15:20 UTC - Rodric Rabbah: hi @D.K
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585710920032700
----
2020-04-01 03:15:57 UTC - Rodric Rabbah: non blocking activations have no 
listeners so the completion message’s role is to clear up a reservation slot in 
the load balancer
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585710957032800?thread_ts=1585709821.032200&cid=C3TPCAQG1
----
2020-04-01 03:16:03 UTC - Rodric Rabbah: as such it carries minimal information
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585710963033000?thread_ts=1585709821.032200&cid=C3TPCAQG1
----
2020-04-01 03:17:14 UTC - D.K: Hello!
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585711034034100
----
2020-04-01 03:21:36 UTC - Brendan Doyle: I see. Our service listens on the 
completed topics to know when the activation completed and whether it 
succeeded. That way we know when to check couchdb for the result when it’s 
ready and not poll couchdb on a long interval. The message already has 
isWhiskError which is the same data as just sending the status code of 0, 1, 2, 
3. Would you be open to us adding status code back to the message?
+1 : Rodric Rabbah
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585711296038100?thread_ts=1585709821.032200&cid=C3TPCAQG1
----
2020-04-01 04:14:45 UTC - Rodric Rabbah: There is a kafka topic that has 
activations streamed with a lot of the activation metadata. Did you consider 
using that?
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585714485039900?thread_ts=1585709821.032200&cid=C3TPCAQG1
----
2020-04-01 04:18:29 UTC - Brendan Doyle: I’ll take a look tomorrow and get back 
to you. So that’s not the ‘completed’ topic? Do you know what the topic is 
called?
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585714709041400?thread_ts=1585709821.032200&cid=C3TPCAQG1
----
2020-04-01 04:24:07 UTC - Rodric Rabbah: no it’s called something else. 
Blanking in the name atm. If you don’t find it I’ll look. 
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585715047042600?thread_ts=1585709821.032200&cid=C3TPCAQG1
----
2020-04-01 04:24:42 UTC - Rodric Rabbah: That topic unlike completion is meant 
for external consumption. 
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585715082043400?thread_ts=1585709821.032200&cid=C3TPCAQG1
----
2020-04-01 07:49:46 UTC - Brendan Doyle: are you thinking of the `events` 
topic? The issue there is it doesn't have the activationId, which we could 
easily add looking at the code. It would be okay so long as the events topic 
also acts as a source of truth in that the message is guaranteed to be on the 
events topic if the controller accepts that the activation is completed.

also while we're on the topic, the activation persister service pull request 
would fit exactly what we need as the info is on the new topics and that topic 
is consumed directly to the db. any idea on the status of that pull request? I 
would be interested in helping with getting that across the finish line
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585727386043800?thread_ts=1585709821.032200&cid=C3TPCAQG1
----
2020-04-01 12:55:52 UTC - Rodric Rabbah: @chetanm what’s the status of the 
persister pr ?
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585745752044200?thread_ts=1585709821.032200&cid=C3TPCAQG1
----
2020-04-01 13:01:38 UTC - Dave Grove: REMINDER!: OW Technical Interchange call 
starts in ~ 1 hour from now
• 10am EDT - New York; 7am PDT - San Francisco; 3pm CET - Berlin/Rome; 2pm GMT; 
11pm KST - Seoul; 10pm CST - Beijing;
• *Zoom:* *<https://zoom.us/my/asfopenwhisk>*

https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585746098044600
----
2020-04-01 13:41:55 UTC - chetanm: Its missing support for non blocking flow. 
Just not getting time to work on that since long time
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585748515044800?thread_ts=1585709821.032200&cid=C3TPCAQG1
----
2020-04-01 13:51:58 UTC - chetanm: There were plans to record the transactionId 
as metadata within Activation record which can later allow for using it on 
query side
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585749118045600
----
2020-04-01 13:52:11 UTC - chetanm: But thats not implemented so far
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585749131045900
----
2020-04-01 13:53:11 UTC - Rodric Rabbah: is it ok to merge the PR without non 
blocking support and add that in a second pr?
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585749191046000?thread_ts=1585709821.032200&cid=C3TPCAQG1
----
2020-04-01 13:53:34 UTC - chetanm: I think its lagging behind master quite a bit
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585749214046200?thread_ts=1585709821.032200&cid=C3TPCAQG1
----
2020-04-01 13:53:40 UTC - chetanm: would try to get it upto date
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585749220046400?thread_ts=1585709821.032200&cid=C3TPCAQG1
----
2020-04-01 13:53:52 UTC - chetanm: and then based on diff we can take a call if 
its safe
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585749232046600?thread_ts=1585709821.032200&cid=C3TPCAQG1
----
2020-04-01 13:55:13 UTC - Rodric Rabbah: that could give @Brendan Doyle a 
foundation to extend for non-blocking support
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585749313046800?thread_ts=1585709821.032200&cid=C3TPCAQG1
----
2020-04-01 13:55:57 UTC - chetanm: @Saahitya E See 
<https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/2a3416279705aa6fc0fde124126f7a41c6f4655fd78a0af12e34c5aa%40%3Cdev.openwhisk.apache.org%3E|this
 thread> for details
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585749357047200?thread_ts=1585749357.047200&cid=C3TPCAQG1
----
2020-04-01 13:56:07 UTC - Rodric Rabbah: thanks Chetan for the update
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585749367047300?thread_ts=1585709821.032200&cid=C3TPCAQG1
----
2020-04-01 13:56:41 UTC - chetanm: makes sense. Would try to sort this out … 
probably by weekend
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585749401047500?thread_ts=1585709821.032200&cid=C3TPCAQG1
----
2020-04-01 13:58:42 UTC - Dave Grove: REMINDER!: OW Technical Interchange call 
starting now
• 10am EDT - New York; 7am PDT - San Francisco; 3pm CET - Berlin/Rome; 2pm GMT; 
11pm KST - Seoul; 10pm CST - Beijing;
• *Zoom:* *<https://zoom.us/my/asfopenwhisk>*

https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585749522048000
----
2020-04-01 13:59:44 UTC - Saahitya E: Thanks @chetanm , let me explain what I 
am doing, zipkin tracing records spans with transaction id and I wanted to map 
it to activationid and the corresponding action to do some analysis.
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585749584048100?thread_ts=1585749357.047200&cid=C3TPCAQG1
----
2020-04-01 14:01:02 UTC - chetanm: That may be possible by sending both id to 
zipkin … not sure if current impl does that
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585749662048300?thread_ts=1585749357.047200&cid=C3TPCAQG1
----
2020-04-01 14:51:06 UTC - Shubham Gupta: Hi guys,
When i'm updating an action it gives `Concurrent modification to resource 
detected` error, and when i'm trying to delete this action it gives 404 `The 
requested resource does not exist` . has anyone faced this issue before ??
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585752666051900
----
2020-04-01 15:18:26 UTC - Rodric Rabbah: almost surely this is means the action 
is wedged
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585754306052200
----
2020-04-01 15:18:50 UTC - Rodric Rabbah: and case of this defect 
<https://github.com/apache/openwhisk/issues/2051>
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585754330052500
----
2020-04-01 15:19:12 UTC - Rodric Rabbah: you’ll need to manually delete the 
action from the database as a workaround to this defect
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1585754352053000
----

Reply via email to