markusthoemmes commented on a change in pull request #2584: SPI for Loadbalancer
URL:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk/pull/2584#discussion_r132406663
##########
File path:
core/controller/src/main/scala/whisk/core/loadBalancer/LoadBalancerService.scala
##########
@@ -77,16 +82,32 @@ trait LoadBalancer {
*/
def publish(action: ExecutableWhiskAction, msg:
ActivationMessage)(implicit transid: TransactionId):
Future[Future[Either[ActivationId, WhiskActivation]]]
+ /**
+ * Return a message indicating the health of the containers and/or
container pool in general
+ * @return a Future[String] representing the heal response that will be
sent to the client
+ */
+ def getHealthResponse: Future[JsObject]
+}
+
+class LoadBalancerServiceProvider extends LoadBalancerProvider {
+ override def getLoadBalancer(config: WhiskConfig, instance: InstanceId)
+ (implicit logging: Logging, actorSystem: ActorSystem):
LoadBalancer = new LoadBalancerService(config, instance)
+}
+
+object LoadBalancerServiceProvider extends SpiFactory[LoadBalancerProvider]{
+ override def apply(dependencies: Dependencies): LoadBalancerProvider = new
LoadBalancerServiceProvider
}
class LoadBalancerService(
config: WhiskConfig,
- instance: InstanceId,
- entityStore: EntityStore)(
+ instance: InstanceId)(
implicit val actorSystem: ActorSystem,
logging: Logging)
extends LoadBalancer {
+ /** Used to manage an action for testing invoker health */
+ val entityStore = WhiskEntityStore.datastore(config)
Review comment:
What's the rationale for generating a new one (and deduplicate via the SPI)
vs. passing it through the `Dependencies` object? (Not necessarily arguing
against this, just curiosity)
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
With regards,
Apache Git Services
