openwhisk-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From TzuChiao Yeh <su3g4284zo...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Proposal on a future architecture of OpenWhisk
Date Tue, 17 Jul 2018 06:24:48 GMT
Hi Markus,

Awesome work! Thanks for doing this.

One simple question here: due to directly call actions via http calls, do
we still persist activation (i.e. duplicate activations into somewhere
storage)? Since we already provide "best-effort" invocation for users, not
sure persistence is still worth-doing. Or maybe we can provide some
guarantee options in the future?

Thanks,
Tzu-Chiao Yeh (@tz70s)


On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 12:42 AM Markus Thoemmes <markus.thoemmes@de.ibm.com>
wrote:

> Hi Chetan,
>
> > Hi Thomas,
>
> It's Markus Thömmes/Thoemmes respectively :)
>
> > Is this routing round robin for per namespace + action name url or is
> > it for any url? For e.g. if we have controller c1-c3 and request come
> > in order a1,a2,a3, a1 which controller would be handling which action
> > here?
>
> It's for any URL. I'm not sure the general front-door (nginx in our case)
> supports keyed round-robin/least-connected. For sanity, I basically assume
> that every request can land on any controller with no control of how that
> might happen.
>
> Cheers,
> Markus
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message