Skip to content
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

Support for multiple trigger types in a single Spin application #1755

Closed
mikkelhegn opened this issue Sep 12, 2023 · 4 comments · Fixed by #2213
Closed

Support for multiple trigger types in a single Spin application #1755

mikkelhegn opened this issue Sep 12, 2023 · 4 comments · Fixed by #2213

Comments

@mikkelhegn
Copy link
Contributor

This has been frequently mentioned in conversations, and also in issues (E.g., #1005), but I couldn't find an issue to track the request, so here it is.

A frequent Discord thread laid out a relevant scenario as well: https://discord.com/channels/926888690310053918/1149614859185569852

@melissaklein24 melissaklein24 moved this to 🆕 New in Spin 2.0 Sep 13, 2023
@vdice vdice moved this to 🆕 Triage Needed in Spin Triage Sep 13, 2023
@vdice
Copy link
Contributor

vdice commented Sep 14, 2023

This is also being discussed in #1753

@vdice vdice removed this from Spin Triage Sep 14, 2023
@vdice vdice moved this to 🆕 Triage Needed in Spin Triage Sep 14, 2023
@vdice vdice moved this from 🆕 Triage Needed to 🔖 Backlog in Spin Triage Sep 14, 2023
@melissaklein24 melissaklein24 moved this from 🆕 New to Post Release in Spin 2.0 Sep 27, 2023
@carlokok
Copy link
Contributor

carlokok commented Jan 6, 2024

I made a start (work in progress) on this:
main...carlokok:spin:feat/multiple-triggertypes

However before I continue, I would like to ask if this is an approach you'd all be oke with. (Note it's not done yet).

Essentially, trigger_type in up/app_source.rs returns a vector, and it spawns multiple trigger commands at once.

If this is oke, I'll continue working on it and do a PR when all works & tests are updated.

@itowlson
Copy link
Collaborator

itowlson commented Jan 7, 2024

@carlokok Thanks heaps for taking this on! The approach looks good to me, although there may be some nasties in the details (for example, spin up --help, the outbound HTTP to self, triggers using the same name for an option). Many of these will be fine to defer though.

cc @lann who has thought about this issue more deeply

@carlokok
Copy link
Contributor

carlokok commented Jan 8, 2024

One thing I need to fix is that HTTP and REDIS use the old "trigger" field in the .lock file, instead of triggers. Once that's up I should have a working PR.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

5 participants