Re: Pausing actions, waiting for human input etc.

[Matt Sicker]

What you're describing sounds a lot like what Jenkins does for user
input steps in a build. A stateful task manager is required to do this
as you've been exploring. For debugging purposes, do you think it may
be simpler to write a dedicated service around this, or would a more
serverless approach be that straightforward? I'm not very clear on the
implementation details myself, so this is sort of spitballing here.

On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 at 10:10, Bertrand Delacretaz
 wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Thank you everybody for you replies.
>
> I understand implementing this directly in OpenWhisk is challenging,
> and especially this comment from Olivier:
>
> On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 6:12 PM Olivier Tardieu  wrote:
> > ...Alternatively, the dynamic creation of trigger-like and rule-like things
> > can be pushed to an external system outside of OpenWhisk. This
> > addresses issue number 2 and can also help with 1...
>
> makes me think that it's worth looking at how a distinct "state
> machine service" can help with that, rather than making complex
> changes to OpenWhisk itself.
>
> Maybe that service can be a set of OpenWhisk Actions...that would
> avoid having to deploy additional services (outside of states
> persistence) while not having to make core changes. At the cost of
> some performance probably, but if it's about slow human-driven or
> batch processing workflows that might not be a real problem.
>
> I'll think about a minimal prototype that would demonstrate that and
> share it here if I succeed.
>
> -Bertrand



-- 
Matt Sicker 

Re: Pausing actions, waiting for human input etc.

[Bertrand Delacretaz]

Hi,

Thank you everybody for you replies.

I understand implementing this directly in OpenWhisk is challenging,
and especially this comment from Olivier:

On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 6:12 PM Olivier Tardieu  wrote:
> ...Alternatively, the dynamic creation of trigger-like and rule-like things
> can be pushed to an external system outside of OpenWhisk. This
> addresses issue number 2 and can also help with 1...

makes me think that it's worth looking at how a distinct "state
machine service" can help with that, rather than making complex
changes to OpenWhisk itself.

Maybe that service can be a set of OpenWhisk Actions...that would
avoid having to deploy additional services (outside of states
persistence) while not having to make core changes. At the cost of
some performance probably, but if it's about slow human-driven or
batch processing workflows that might not be a real problem.

I'll think about a minimal prototype that would demonstrate that and
share it here if I succeed.

-Bertrand

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Client JS (incubating) 3.19.0

[Bertrand Delacretaz]

Hi,

On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 7:53 PM Matt Sicker  wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 at 12:07, James Thomas  wrote:
> > Non-binding +1:
> > Matt Sicker
>
> I think this might be wrong now that I'm a mentor? Or does it only
> apply to the IPMC vote?...

Matt's vote is binding both here (as an incubation mentor) and for the
Incubator PMC as he's a member of the PMC (which all mentors are,
that's a requirement).

-Bertrand

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Client JS (incubating) 3.19.0

[James Thomas]

Hey Matt, I'm not sure about that - probably something to ask the mentors! ;)

Dave Grove did tell me that dev-list votes from IPMC members roll over
to the IPMC mailing list vote thread automatically, so you don't need
to vote again.

On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 at 18:53, Matt Sicker  wrote:
>
> On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 at 12:07, James Thomas  wrote:
> > Non-binding +1:
> > Matt Sicker
>
> I think this might be wrong now that I'm a mentor? Or does it only
> apply to the IPMC vote?
>
> --
> Matt Sicker 



-- 
Regards,
James Thomas

[slack-digest] [2019-03-26] #random

[OpenWhisk Team Slack]

2019-03-26 06:52:16 UTC - Jin Choi: I am running an Openwhisk system on my own. 
A client of mine asked if he could make an action for zipping up hundreds of 
jpeg files which are fetched from another server so that his clients can 
download zipped files of images. But I see the maximum output size of an action 
invocation is 1MB and fixed @ 

Do you think the suggested use case is not good for Openwhisk?
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3UDXSFA6/p155358313600?thread_ts=1553583136.00=C3UDXSFA6

2019-03-26 06:54:11 UTC - chetanm: It would be better to post that zip to some 
file server or object store like S3 and send back a url for that in response
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3UDXSFA6/p1553583251333600?thread_ts=1553583136.00=C3UDXSFA6

2019-03-26 06:56:26 UTC - Jin Choi: You mean, make an action that fetches 100 
images, zips them up, stores it on some file server and then return the URI for 
the zip?
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3UDXSFA6/p1553583386333800?thread_ts=1553583136.00=C3UDXSFA6

2019-03-26 06:56:40 UTC - chetanm: yup
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3UDXSFA6/p1553583400334000?thread_ts=1553583136.00=C3UDXSFA6

2019-03-26 06:58:18 UTC - Jin Choi: Doesn't it still make as large traffic as 
the zip file to upload it to some file server? I thought it was impossible 
because of the maximum output size limit of an action invocation (1MB)
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3UDXSFA6/p1553583498334200?thread_ts=1553583136.00=C3UDXSFA6

2019-03-26 06:59:26 UTC - chetanm: Actions can connect to any such “external” 
file server directly and such not bounded by limits placed on activation 
response
+1 : Jin Choi
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3UDXSFA6/p1553583566334400?thread_ts=1553583136.00=C3UDXSFA6

2019-03-26 06:59:29 UTC - Markus Thömmes: @Jin Choi that output limit only 
applies to the function results. Traffic wise you can do whatever you want from 
the OW perspective
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3UDXSFA6/p1553583569334600?thread_ts=1553583136.00=C3UDXSFA6

2019-03-26 07:00:00 UTC - Jin Choi: Now it sounds clear. Thanks for the 
clarification, guys
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3UDXSFA6/p1553583600334800?thread_ts=1553583136.00=C3UDXSFA6

2019-03-26 07:00:05 UTC - Markus Thömmes: in this example, your "action result" 
would for example be the status of the file-server operation (success or error) 
and maybe the URL that it's written.
thankyou : Jin Choi
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3UDXSFA6/p1553583605335000?thread_ts=1553583136.00=C3UDXSFA6

2019-03-26 10:33:11 UTC - James Thomas: @Jin Choi That limit is actually 5MB on 
IBM Cloud Functions - the docs need updating.
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3UDXSFA6/p1553596391335400?thread_ts=1553583136.00=C3UDXSFA6

2019-03-26 10:57:39 UTC - Carlos Santana: 

https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3UDXSFA6/p1553597859335700

2019-03-26 15:10:27 UTC - Michele Sciabarra: yes I am installing openwhisk on 
it today :slightly_smiling_face:
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3UDXSFA6/p1553613027336100