-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 148
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add a new lifetime
property to the container
process
#1049
Add a new lifetime
property to the container
process
#1049
Conversation
Closes serverlessworkflow#1013 Signed-off-by: Charles d'Avernas <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should this control not be on the platform instead? In which cases would a user like to control the infra behavior from the workflow? I can see plenty since users are creative, but it is a dangerous mix of functional and non-functional requirements.
Not really, no, as this should be configurable on a per-container basis. Some containers will just run dumb work which no one cares about double checking, whereas others might be critical and require auditing. |
I agree. The platform should know the containers a given workflow would spawn, and an operator/admin could manage it. My point is that in the long term, we will add new things like |
@ricardozanini Well, resource management is another story imho. The PR is just addressing some high level lifecycle management concerns. Anyhow, we can close the PR and related issue as won't implement if you prefer 😉 |
No, I think it's valuable. I am just raising a concern about what can grow more complex if we open Pandora's box. We can keep this one as long as we don't start transforming the |
Please specify parts of this PR update:
Discussion or Issue link:
#1013
What this PR does:
lifetime
property to thecontainer
process