openwhisk-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tyson Norris <tnor...@adobe.com.INVALID>
Subject Re: Kafka and Proposal on a future architecture of OpenWhisk
Date Thu, 23 Aug 2018 22:07:38 GMT
    > Router is not pulling at queue for "specific actions", just for any action
    > that might replace idle containers - right? This is complicated with
    > concurrency though since while a container is not idle (paused +
    > removable), it may be useable, but only if the action received is the same
    > as one existing warm container, and that container has concurrency slots
    > available for additional activations. It may be helpful to diagram some of
    > this stealing queue flow a bit more, I'm not seeing how it will work out
    > other than creating more containers than is absolutely required, which may
    > be ok, not sure.
    >
    
    Yes, I will diagram things out soonish, I'm a little bit narrow on time
    currently.
    
    The idea is that indeed the Router pulls for *specific* actions. This is a
    problem when using Kafka, but might be solvable when we don't require
    Kafka. I have to test this for feasibility though.
    
    
Hmm OK - it's not clear how a router that is empty (not servicing any activations) becomes
a router that is pulling for that specific action, when other routers pulling for that action
are at capacity (so new containers are needed)


Mime
View raw message