style95 commented on a change in pull request #4954:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openwhisk/pull/4954#discussion_r480019902
##########
File path:
core/invoker/src/main/scala/org/apache/openwhisk/core/invoker/InvokerReactive.scala
##########
@@ -164,6 +164,62 @@ class InvokerReactive(
private val pool =
actorSystem.actorOf(ContainerPool.props(childFactory, poolConfig,
activationFeed, prewarmingConfigs))
+ def handleActivationMessage(msg: ActivationMessage)(implicit transid:
TransactionId): Future[Unit] = {
+ val namespace = msg.action.path
+ val name = msg.action.name
+ val actionid = FullyQualifiedEntityName(namespace,
name).toDocId.asDocInfo(msg.revision)
+ val subject = msg.user.subject
+
+ logging.debug(this, s"${actionid.id} $subject ${msg.activationId}")
+
+ // caching is enabled since actions have revision id and an updated
+ // action will not hit in the cache due to change in the revision id;
+ // if the doc revision is missing, then bypass cache
+ if (actionid.rev == DocRevision.empty) logging.warn(this, s"revision was
not provided for ${actionid.id}")
+
+ WhiskAction
+ .get(entityStore, actionid.id, actionid.rev, fromCache = actionid.rev !=
DocRevision.empty)
+ .flatMap(action => {
+ action.toExecutableWhiskAction match {
+ case Some(executable) =>
+ val newMsg = msg.copy(revision = executable.rev, action =
action.fullyQualifiedName(true))
+ pool ! Run(executable, newMsg)
+ Future.successful(())
+ case None =>
+ logging.error(this, s"non-executable action reached the invoker
${action.fullyQualifiedName(false)}")
+ Future.failed(new IllegalStateException("non-executable action
reached the invoker"))
+ }
+ })
+ .recoverWith {
+ case DocumentRevisionMismatchException(_) =>
+ // if revision is mismatched, the action may have been updated,
+ // so try again with the latest code
+ handleActivationMessage(msg.copy(revision = DocRevision.empty))
Review comment:
Not quite sure about this.
It would be great to listen to other reviewers' opinions as well.
From some point of view, it could be a semantic change as activations that
are supposed to be rejected would be invoked successfully.
(With an assumption that the codes are backward compatible.)
How about sending an email to the dev list to get more people to attend this
PR?
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
