-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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
Link to Eventing Data Plane Contract/SPEC #4943
Comments
@knative-sandbox/func-wg-leads @knative/eventing-wg-leads can ya'll provide some information here about what needs to be documented? |
This is the spec version of the content to document https://github.com/knative/specs/blob/main/specs/eventing/data-plane.md#event-acknowledgement-and-delivery-retry |
This issue is stale because it has been open for 90 days with no |
/reopen |
@pierDipi: Reopened this issue. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
This issue is stale because it has been open for 90 days with no |
/triage accepted |
Describe the change you'd like to see
Speaking to many function authors (i.e. Knative Service with Eventing), especially newcomers, most of them are not aware of the underlying data plane contract, e.g. used by
brokers
. This can lead to issues where retry and error behavior by a function (Kservice
) is incorrectly assumed/handled.Examples
SPEC
says to retry on404
which is typically not what users expect (404
s are usually not retriable and the SPEC bends the rules here IMHO a bit for a particular use case).Proposal: add a section to the docs describing the impact of the data plane contract to Knative function authors so at least they are aware of the behavior. The only issue is that not all implementations might strictly follow the SPEC, so this should be considered best effort/best practice for now until we are sure that all implementations strictly follow the SPEC.
Additional context
Add any other context or screenshots about the feature request here.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: