openwhisk-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martin Henke <martin.he...@web.de>
Subject Re: Passing TransactionId as part of action invocation
Date Wed, 21 Aug 2019 15:16:12 GMT
Chetan,

from an operational point of view I have some fear that we will confuse the user by making
the transaction id visible as a second id besides the 
activation id. 
Some will certainly use it to fetch activation records and fail, which will lead to questions.
Any thoughts from your side ?

Regards,
Martin


> On 20. Aug 2019, at 12:32, Chetan Mehrotra <chetan.mehrotra@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I created a separate thread to discuss how to store such metadata related
> to activation.
> 
> Current open PR #4586 only enables exposing the transactionId to env. It
> does not make any attempt to store the transactionId currently. Once we
> decide how such data should be stored then I can open PR for  the same
> 
> Chetan Mehrotra
> 
> 
> On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 8:47 AM Rodric Rabbah <rodric@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Yes indeed. Your pr already open I think is fine as is.
>> 
>> -r
>> 
>> On Aug 19, 2019, at 11:36 AM, Chetan Mehrotra <chetan.mehrotra@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>>> That’s true. Time for api/v2...
>>> 
>>> This is now becoming a rabbit hole! What option should we use without
>> going
>>> for v2?
>>> 
>>> 1. Introduce a new "meta" sub document
>>> 2. OR Change annotations to flat map while storing but transform that to
>>> array based structure while returning to client
>>> 
>>> Chetan Mehrotra
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 7:15 AM Rodric Rabbah <rodric@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> However changing them now would cause compatibility
>>>>> issue with various tooling out there which may be interpreting the
>>>>> annotation per current design
>>>> 
>>>> That’s true. Time for api/v2... 😅
>> 


Mime
View raw message