Re: A plan to (re) implement OpenWhisk on top of Knative

2019-05-30 Thread Dascalita Dragos 
Thanks for taking the time to do this POC Michele. I'm looking forward for
learn about the cold-start times with KNative.

On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 8:48 AM Michele Sciabarra 
wrote:

> I am taking all the suggestions and trying to setup a first implementation.
>
>
> --
>   Michele Sciabarra
>   mich...@sciabarra.com
>
> - Original message -
> From: James Thomas 
> To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> Subject: Re: A plan to (re) implement OpenWhisk on top of Knative
> Date: Friday, May 24, 2019 5:39 PM
>
> On Mon, 20 May 2019 at 15:50, Markus Thömmes 
> wrote:
> >
> > Can we try to define what the desired end-goal is here? I'm a bit unclear
> > what resembling the OpenWhisk API actually buys us.
> >
> > To me, the desired end-state would be to run OpenWhisk actions as-is on a
> > Knative cluster (similar to OpenFaaS' and Azure's integration). There's
> no
> > good way for us to provide the full API without spinning up a control
> plane
> > and we can only handle so much via the CLI. So to me, the end-goal looks
> > like:
> >
> > 1. *wsk action create* actually doing all the pieces necessary to run a
> > piece of code on Knative.
> > 2. *wsk action invoke* doing some HTTP call under the hood to "invoke"
> that
> > action. The action should be reachable via a sensible URL. If we really
> > want to keep the API surface (as I said, I'm dubious here) we can also do
> > that via ingress level abstractions (like VirtualService).
>
> I've been spending a bit more time reading up on knative this week and
> agree with Markus' suggestions. In the short term, being able to run
> an OpenWhisk action on Knative with no changes to the action code is a
> good first step. I think the work Priti has done with others to make
> the Node.js runtime Knative compatible is a sensible step towards
> this. (
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-runtime-nodejs/pull/119)
> If we can utilise that approach with the actionloop runtimes - that'd
> be great.
>
> This means people can move (simple) OpenWhisk actions from a platform
> instance to knative with minimal changes. Having a defined build
> pipeline to produce docker images from action code seems like the next
> step... The user has to do this manually but it simplifies the process
> of building those images manually.
>
> The longer-term discussion is whether we allow people to use the
> existing OpenWhisk API (and tools) as a proxy for actions deployed on
> knative. This would means people can switch their clients (CLI)
> between a normal openwhisk instance and a knative-based one.. This
> would be similiar to how projects like Riff operate.
>
> Gloo does have some interesting concepts around "function level"
> routing that are building out that might be useful
> (https://gloo.solo.io/user_guides/cloud_function/)
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> James Thomas
>

[VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk Runtime Node.js (v0.14.0, rc2) apache-openwhisk x

2019-05-30 Thread James Thomas 
Hello,

This is a call to vote on releasing version 1.14.0-incubating release
candidate rc2 of the following project module with artifacts
built from the Git repositories and commit IDs listed below.

* Apache OpenWhisk Runtime Node.js: 14d2af8
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-runtime-nodejs.git/commits/14d2af8

This release is comprised of source code distribution only.

You can use this UNIX script to download the release and verify the
checklist below:
https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-openwhisk-release.git;a=blob_plain;f=tools/rcverify.sh;hb=HEAD

Usage:
curl -s 
"https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-openwhisk-release.git;a=blob_plain;f=tools/rcverify.sh;hb=HEAD;
-o rcverify.sh
chmod +x rcverify.sh
rcverify.sh openwhisk-runtime-nodejs 'OpenWhisk Runtime Node.js'
1.14.0-incubating rc2

Please vote to approve this release:

  [ ] +1 Approve the release
  [ ]  0 Don't care
  [ ] -1 Don't release, because ...

Release verification checklist for reference:
  [ ] Download links are valid.
  [ ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
  [ ] DISCLAIMER is included.
  [ ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
  [ ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repository.
  [ ] All files have license headers if necessary.
  [ ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.

This majority vote is open for at least 72 hours.



-- 
Regards,
James Thomas

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk API Gateway (v0.10.0-incubating, rc2)

2019-05-30 Thread James Thomas 
 [x] +1 Approve the release

Release verification checklist for reference:
  [x] Download links are valid.
  [x] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
  [x] DISCLAIMER is included.
  [x] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
  [x] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repository.
  [x] All files have license headers as specified by OpenWhisk project
policy
  [x] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.

On Thu, 30 May 2019 at 02:51, Matt Hamann  wrote:
>
>  [x] +1 Approve the release
>
> Release verification checklist for reference:
>   [x] Download links are valid.
>   [x] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
>   [x] DISCLAIMER is included.
>   [x] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current release.
>   [x] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repository.
>   [x] All files have license headers as specified by OpenWhisk project
> policy
>   [x] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
>
> 
> -Matt
> matthew.ham...@gmail.com
>
>
> On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 9:27 PM Dascalita Dragos  wrote:
>
> > [x] +1 Approve the release
> >
> > Release verification checklist for reference:
> >   [x] Download links are valid.
> >   [x] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
> >   [x] DISCLAIMER is included.
> >   [x] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current
> > release.
> >   [x] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk repository.
> >   [x] All files have license headers as specified by OpenWhisk project
> > policy [1].
> >   [x] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > dragos
> >
> > PS: rcverify.sh is awesome !
> >
> > On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 3:22 PM Rodric Rabbah  wrote:
> >
> > >  [x] +1 Approve the release
> > >
> > > Release verification checklist for reference:
> > >   [x ] Download links are valid.
> > >   [x ] Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
> > >   [x ] DISCLAIMER is included.
> > >   [x ] Source code artifacts have correct names matching the current
> > > release.
> > >   [x ] LICENSE and NOTICE files are correct for each OpenWhisk
> > repository.
> > >   [x ] All files have license headers as specified by OpenWhisk project
> > > policy [1].
> > >   [x ] No compiled archives bundled in source archive.
> > >
> > >
> > > ./tools/rcverify.sh openwhisk-apigateway 'OpenWhisk API Gateway'
> > > 0.10.0-incubating rc2
> > > rcverify.sh (script SHA1: 6871 208F 37F8 2352 BA60  E66E 8953 94E8 2832
> > > AA69)
> > > working in the following directory:
> > > /var/folders/q9/s3th42s53d34ftd5wvcypybrgn/T/tmp.vrfdBO8F
> > > fetching tarball and signatures from
> > >
> > >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/apache-openwhisk-0.10.0-incubating-rc2
> > > fetching openwhisk-apigateway-0.10.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
> > > fetching openwhisk-apigateway-0.10.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.asc
> > > fetching openwhisk-apigateway-0.10.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz.sha512
> > > fetching release keys
> > > importing keys
> > > gpg: key 72AF0CC22C4CF320: "Vincent Hou (Release manager of OpenWhisk) <
> > > houshen...@apache.org>" not changed
> > > gpg: key 22907064147F886E: "Dave Grove " not changed
> > > gpg: key 44667BC927C86D51: "Rodric Rabbah " not
> > changed
> > > gpg: Total number processed: 3
> > > gpg:  unchanged: 3
> > > unpacking tar ball
> > > cloning scancode
> > > Cloning into 'incubator-openwhisk-utilities'...
> > > remote: Enumerating objects: 57, done.
> > > remote: Counting objects: 100% (57/57), done.
> > > remote: Compressing objects: 100% (42/42), done.
> > > remote: Total 57 (delta 19), reused 37 (delta 12), pack-reused 0
> > > Unpacking objects: 100% (57/57), done.
> > > computing sha512 for
> > openwhisk-apigateway-0.10.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz
> > > SHA512: openwhisk-apigateway-0.10.0-incubating-sources.tar.gz:
> > > F3A852F8 95982ED3 5735336F D1A85FF6 AE4575AA BAF251A7 0B77AA40 EE4D0727
> > > 09C40A99
> > >  6F1BD0ED CDA91B9B 59C9C3AF 19E7AC52 BF05A869 61C113D9 D42BB691
> > > validating sha512... passed
> > > verifying asc... passed (signed-by: Dave Grove )
> > > verifying disclaimer... passed
> > > verifing notice... passed
> > > verifying license... passed
> > > verifying sources have proper headers... passed
> > > scanning for executable files... passed
> > > scanning for non-text files... passed
> > > scanning for archives... passed
> > > scanning for packages... passed
> > >
> > > run the following command to remove the scratch space:
> > >
> > > On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 5:50 PM David P Grove  wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > As discussed in [2], there was a regression in rc1 of
> > apigateway.
> > > > so
> > > > we needed to generate a new release candidate once the fix had been
> > > merged.
> > > > That has been done. Therefore...
> > > >
> > > > This is a call to vote on releasing version 0.10.0-incubating

[slack-digest] [2019-05-29] #general

2019-05-30 Thread OpenWhisk Team Slack 
2019-05-29 10:19:33 UTC - hub: hi, one question, I've created openwhisk using 
helm on kubernetes, and when I want to create ruby action i get ```error: 
Invalid argument(s). '.rb' is not a supported action runtime
Run 'wsk --help' for usage.```, can someone tell me if I am doing something 
wrong?
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1559125173005700?thread_ts=1559125173.005700=C3TPCAQG1

2019-05-29 14:16:32 UTC - Matt Rutkowski: being most (if not all) are “xmlns” 
(i.e., XML namespaces) to uniquely qualify the document elements and are not 
used for actual connections, is this still a real concern?
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1559139392006200?thread_ts=1558441355.16=C3TPCAQG1

2019-05-29 14:30:52 UTC - Justin Halsall: Hi all, I'm running a little low on 
content for our upcoming Openwhisk Tech Interchange, if anyone has any updates 
they'd like to share or anything they are working on they'd like to present, 
please let me know!
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1559140252007500?thread_ts=1559140252.007500=C3TPCAQG1

2019-05-29 14:33:07 UTC - Dave Grove: sorry, have a conflict today.  not going 
to make it.
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1559140387007600?thread_ts=1559140252.007500=C3TPCAQG1

2019-05-29 15:00:13 UTC - Justin Halsall: Reminder: Web Meeting: Tech 
Interchange (bi-weekly) starting NOW
* Zoom: 
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1559142013008100

2019-05-29 15:06:09 UTC - Rodric Rabbah: is your wsk cli recent?
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1559142369008500?thread_ts=1559125173.005700=C3TPCAQG1

2019-05-29 15:06:14 UTC - Rodric Rabbah: 

https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1559142374008700?thread_ts=1559125173.005700=C3TPCAQG1

2019-05-29 17:25:52 UTC - chetanm: Is there any metric we capture to indicate 
time spent in finding/allocating a container. `initTime` I believe is time 
spent in `/init` call. I am looking for a metric which captures the time which 
is spent in container factory to allocate and return a container
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1559150752010300

2019-05-29 17:26:46 UTC - chetanm: May be for DockerContainerFactory it does 
not make much difference as it would be genrally small … however for k8s and 
mesos this may be high
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1559150806011200

2019-05-29 17:32:34 UTC - Rodric Rabbah: `waitTime` on the activation
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1559151154011400

2019-05-29 17:32:48 UTC - Rodric Rabbah: that includes time spent in kafka + 
time spent allocating a container
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1559151168011800

2019-05-29 17:34:21 UTC - Rodric Rabbah: there are also metrics emitted for the 
docker operations so you can see the min/max/avg for the container management
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1559151261013400

2019-05-29 17:35:28 UTC - chetanm: okie … may be we should have a separate 
attribute to capture container allocation time
+1 : Dominic Kim
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1559151328014200

2019-05-29 17:35:46 UTC - chetanm: As this would be a more variable factor for 
setups using container orchestrator
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1559151346014700

2019-05-29 20:11:10 UTC - Saurab Joshi: "it is overloaded or down for 
maintenance openwhisk" I have seen this couple of times when I try to invoke a 
function. What do i need to do? I am currently running openwhisk on one server 
using docker-compose. Would it be better if I run it on Kubernetes and have 
containers scale up?
https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1559160670016300