Tyson Norris wrote on 08/15/2018 08:29:48 PM:
>
> FWIW This won’t help with concurrent activations since the logs from
> concurrent activations will be interleaved (I think Dave was not
> suggesting to use this for concurrent activations). It will only
> help in the case where log processing is
This was a pretty simple change, so to make things concrete I have PRs with
a prototype of the enabling change in the invoker [1] and a change to the
nodejs runtime to emit the start sentinels [2].
If we go ahead with this design, here's an example from an action that
writes one line to stdout
this path as well. Having this natively supported by all OpenWhisk
> runtimes can only make things easier.
>
>
> From: David P Grove
> Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2018 2:29:12 PM
> To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> Subject: logging baby step -- w
OpenWhisk
runtimes can only make things easier.
From: David P Grove
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2018 2:29:12 PM
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
Subject: logging baby step -- worth pursuing?
Even if we think structured logging is the right eventual goal, it could
ta
Even if we think structured logging is the right eventual goal, it could
take a while to get there (especially since it is changing functionality
users may have grown accustomed to).
However, for non-concurrent, non-blackbox runtimes we could make a small,
not-user visible change, that could
