openwhisk-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rodric Rabbah <rod...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: MiniWhisk: what you think?
Date Wed, 25 Jul 2018 17:22:33 GMT
Michele, this is a useful idea to ease local development. When it's not
enough to test using the native runtime (nodejs. python, go) directly, I
use the invoke.py script [1] to minic running inside the container.

There was a plugin for the cloud shell from IBM that did what you're
suggesting as well and there may be a youtube video for this (@nick
mitchell might know where it is, I couldn't find it easily).

The thought was to push this even further and instead of replicating the
openwhisk API more generally, use a very light weight openwhisk like the
one David and Pavel are alluding to.

I do think this is a generally useful tool for local development and I
think we have several parts to make it possible today. +1 from me.

[1]
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk/blob/master/tools/actionProxy/invoke.py

-r


On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 5:17 PM, David Breitgand <DAVIDBR@il.ibm.com> wrote:

> Hi Michele,
>
> There is a PR we've submitted on Lean OpenWhisk (
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk/pull/3886)
> There is also a blog here:
> https://medium.com/openwhisk/lean-openwhisk-open-source-
> faas-for-edge-computing-fb823c6bbb9b
>
> Would you like to look at it and see if it will be good enough for what
> you want to achieve.
> The idea is to have OW (an actual one based on the Controller and Invoker
> upstream), but with a very small memory footprint.
>
> Thanks.
>
> -- david
>
>
>
>
> From:   Michele Sciabarra <openwhisk@sciabarra.com>
> To:     dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> Date:   25/07/2018 08:02 PM
> Subject:        MiniWhisk: what you think?
>
>
>
> Hello,  in the process of developing some examples for the goproxy, I
> realized I want a tool to make easier developing go actions locally. While
> it is generally acceptable to deploy your actions straight to the IBM
> Cloud for example when you code in Javascript (or Python) it is less
> desiderable for Go because compilation time in the cloud is not so fast as
> it is when compiled locally, and you have the additional time of uploading
> a binary that is generally bigger than javascript actions.
>
> SO I ended up with this idea of the "miniwhisk". I am posting here to see
> if  it is acceptable or... there are better solutions.
>
> My idea of the miniwhisk is a "single action " executor. It should work
> more or less this way:
>
> $ miniwhisk /path/of/action  -runtime openwhisk/actionloop-go-v1.10:master
>
>  -watch *.go -build make -action demo
>
> This command will launch the runtime
> "openwhisk/actionloop-go-v1.10:master"  using docker run, then will watch
> the files specified with "-w". When a file changes, it will execute the
> build command (-build) and then execute and "init" of the action runtime,
> post the action to the runtime as an init.
>
> Additional (and most importantly) it starts a webserver that will listen
> to /path/of/action for GET and POST and will then translate requests in
> appropriate /run posts for the runtime.
>
> Basically it is a tool to develop an action in go locally simulating what
> would happen when run in the real OpenWhisk.
>
>
> How does sound the idea? Is it worth the effort?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>   Michele Sciabarra
>   openwhisk@sciabarra.com
>
>
>
>
>
>

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