Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 98
[DO NOT MERGE] Add standalone activity APIs#640
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
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Changes from all commits
d905a7f9ec5439cdfef8abd42747aa94d3ce8b8bbd7409adc9226f70da1ac0c947d7c235c9d66652f55725a2ed1e5c0360941a4049cd2d583ae905bFile filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Jump to
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Large diffs are not rendered by default.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Large diffs are not rendered by default.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,68 @@ | ||
| syntax = "proto3"; | ||
| package temporal.api.enums.v1; | ||
| option go_package = "go.temporal.io/api/enums/v1;enums"; | ||
| option java_package = "io.temporal.api.enums.v1"; | ||
| option java_multiple_files = true; | ||
| option java_outer_classname = "ActivityProto"; | ||
| option ruby_package = "Temporalio::Api::Enums::V1"; | ||
| option csharp_namespace = "Temporalio.Api.Enums.V1"; | ||
| // Status of a standalone activity. | ||
| // The status is updated once, when the activity is originally scheduled, and again when the activity reaches a terminal | ||
| // status. | ||
| // TODO: Should this be a common execution status? Seems like the other archetypes will share this status. | ||
| // (-- api-linter: core::0216::synonyms=disabled | ||
| // aip.dev/not-precedent: Named consistently with WorkflowExecutionStatus. --) | ||
| enum ActivityExecutionStatus { | ||
| ACTIVITY_EXECUTION_STATUS_UNSPECIFIED = 0; | ||
| // The activity is not in a terminal status. This does not necessarily mean that there is a currently running | ||
| // attempt. The activity may be backing off between attempts or waiting for a worker to pick it up. | ||
| ACTIVITY_EXECUTION_STATUS_RUNNING = 1; | ||
| // The activity completed successfully. | ||
| ACTIVITY_EXECUTION_STATUS_COMPLETED = 2; | ||
| // The activity completed with failure. | ||
| ACTIVITY_EXECUTION_STATUS_FAILED = 3; | ||
| // The activity completed as canceled. | ||
| // Requesting to cancel an activity does not automatically transition the activity to canceled status. If the | ||
| // activity has a currently running attempt, the activity will only transition to canceled status if the current | ||
| // attempt is unsuccessful. | ||
| // TODO: Clarify what happens if there are no more allowed retries after the current attempt. | ||
| ACTIVITY_EXECUTION_STATUS_CANCELED = 4; | ||
| // The activity was terminated. Termination does not reach the worker and the activity code cannot react to it. | ||
| // A terminated activity may have a running attempt and will be requested to be canceled by the server when it | ||
| // heartbeats. | ||
| ACTIVITY_EXECUTION_STATUS_TERMINATED = 5; | ||
| // The activity has timed out by reaching the specified shedule-to-start or schedule-to-close timeouts. | ||
| // TODO: Clarify if there are other conditions where the activity can end up in timed out status. | ||
| ACTIVITY_EXECUTION_STATUS_TIMED_OUT = 6; | ||
| } | ||
| // Defines whether to allow re-using an activity ID from a previously *closed* activity. | ||
| // If the request is denied, the server returns an `ActivityExecutionAlreadyStarted` error. | ||
| // | ||
| // See `ActivityIdConflictPolicy` for handling ID duplication with a *running* activity. | ||
| enum ActivityIdReusePolicy { | ||
| ACTIVITY_ID_REUSE_POLICY_UNSPECIFIED = 0; | ||
| // Always allow starting an activity using the same activity ID. | ||
| ACTIVITY_ID_REUSE_POLICY_ALLOW_DUPLICATE = 1; | ||
| // Allow starting an activity using the same ID only when the last activity's final state is one | ||
| // of {failed, canceled, terminated, timed out}. | ||
| ACTIVITY_ID_REUSE_POLICY_ALLOW_DUPLICATE_FAILED_ONLY = 2; | ||
| // Do not permit re-use of the ID for this activity. Future start requests could potentially change the policy, | ||
| // allowing re-use of the ID. | ||
| ACTIVITY_ID_REUSE_POLICY_REJECT_DUPLICATE = 3; | ||
| } | ||
| // Defines what to do when trying to start an activity with the same ID as a *running* activity. | ||
| // Note that it is *never* valid to have two running instances of the same activity ID. | ||
| // | ||
| // See `ActivityIdReusePolicy` for handling activity ID duplication with a *closed* activity. | ||
| enum ActivityIdConflictPolicy { | ||
| ACTIVITY_ID_CONFLICT_POLICY_UNSPECIFIED = 0; | ||
| // Don't start a new activity; instead return `ActivityExecutionAlreadyStarted` error. | ||
| ACTIVITY_ID_CONFLICT_POLICY_FAIL = 1; | ||
| // Don't start a new activity; instead return a handle for the running activity. | ||
| ACTIVITY_ID_CONFLICT_POLICY_USE_EXISTING = 2; | ||
| } | ||
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
We will likely add a
PAUSEDstatus here since this is the direction workflow pause is going.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.
I don't think either are a wise direction. What is happening between "running" and "done" are not traditionally execution statuses. Are you going to have a "backing off" status too? Execution status has traditionally been "running or done", and this changes those expectations unnecessarily. Can you use a separate enum to provide more detailed information about the state the running activity/workflow is in and leave the execution status alone?
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.
That's what we are doing for workflow pause, we should be consistent for any type of execution.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
Right, I am saying we shouldn't do it for workflow pause either (and have mentioned it in those situations too). It's the same reason that "backing off" doesn't need to be a status. Sure it is effectively paused during backoff, but that doesn't affect that Temporal defines activities and workflows as running if they are not completed.
There are many many cases where the expectations would be violated. For instance, people expect ID reuse policy to only apply to not-running workflows, and ID conflict policy to only apply to running workflows. This violates both of those. People expect
ExecutionStatus != Runningquery to give them all completed workflows. I could come up with many more.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.
I think it'd really nice to be able to see paused executions and their counts in the main list view. I don't think "backing off" is the same as pause, we don't update visibility and don't have enough of an incentive to do that for intermediate transient states.
In any case, we shouldn't be having this debate here. Whatever we decide to do for workflows we will copy to activities. For now, we are not even implementing standalone activity pause. That will likely come in the second phase of this project.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
Sure, but that doesn't mean affecting existing fields/concepts like status that have a clear defined expectation and always have
👍