Re: Requesting feedback about the new typescript runtime

Thanks for the details Rodric. I’m then +1 for a dedicated repo. On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 5:18 PM Rodric Rabbah wrote: > It wasn’t done previously because there was no advantage - the go proxy > lead to performance gains for the python runtime and a few others iirc but > was the same for node. The

Re: Requesting feedback about the new typescript runtime

It wasn’t done previously because there was no advantage - the go proxy lead to performance gains for the python runtime and a few others iirc but was the same for node. There was also no support for intra container concurrency. -r > On Jan 9, 2020, at 8:04 PM, Dascalita Dragos wrote: > > Th

Re: Requesting feedback about the new typescript runtime

The argument that the way this new runtime is constructed is very different from the existing nodejs one, seems a strong one in my opinion to consider a dedicated repo. The unclear part to me is whether it would make sense to consider applying the “action loop” pattern to the existing NodeJs Runt

Re: Config runtime

Hi - I would rather see this as an automated + configurable feature, rather than an API that is manually invoked with a user making (possibly bad) decisions. I created an issue to describe this here https://github.com/apache/openwhisk/issues/4725 Part of the reason for automating this, is that

[slack-digest] [2020-01-08] #kubernetes

2020-01-08 14:59:21 UTC - dan mcweeney: FYI Tech Interchange is starting shortly: https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C4J3R7JFL/p1578495561000400

[slack-digest] [2020-01-08] #general

2020-01-08 01:40:01 UTC - Tyson Norris: concurrency is here thankyou : Rodric Rabbah https://openwhisk-team.slack.com/archives/C3TPCAQG1/p1578447601009700 2020-01-08 01:40:29 UTC - Tyson Norris: (but I don’t think there are