3 ms·

I think it's more that your comment is 95% salt and 5% substance an so isn't adding much to the conversation. More details like the connect issue and less "ash

I think it's more that your comment is 95% salt and 5% substance an so isn't adding much to the conversation. More details like the connect issue and less "ash and dregs".

iasay 4y ago
I will write up the 30 years of using MSFT stacks and OS up at some point. That’ll be 100% substance. But the salt will have to remain. If you want to see the real MSFT check out the dotnet team handling of the customer demands to remove telemetry. This is on GitHub issues. Or was if they haven’t reorganised all the repos again thus backing up the other schizophrenic donkey comment.
- ghuntley 4y ago
  See https://isdotnetopen.com https://isdotnetopen.com
  - iasay 4y ago
    Well that was an interesting read and entirely unsurprising. I would never consider building a new product on .Net. It’s an insane proposition at this point.
tremon 4y ago
Well, to give just one example: zip deploys (code) to azure functions always return 200 OK, regardless of whether the deployment actually succeeded. To know if the deployment succeeded, you need to use a second API (the kudu mgmt api) to access the text logs, and scan the text logs for errors. Due to our CI infrastructure, we do multiple deploys per day, and I can tell you that most of our deployments require 2-3 attempts to deploy successfully. We have a whole salt mine of workarounds like that in our deployment infrastructure. It's been that way for years. Every now and then, they pull another Microsoft on top of this. The latest that I remember is that even after successful deployment, the function would actually not get activated until you polled its existence using the Az cli tools. We hit that one because we used the Powershell Az module, and of course the cli tools and powershell exercise different code paths :/
- smackeyacky 4y ago
  Oof. I've come to despise Kudu for these kinds of reasons. We ended up ditching direct zip deployments and now do Docker images, which get pulled automatically using the webhook on the container registry. It is far more reliable and also far easier to integrate into a devops pipeline.
- anirudhgarg 4y ago
  Hi tremon. I work for the Azure Functions team. Sorry for the trouble. This should not happen. We should be giving you a proper response code when the deployment fails. It looks like you are using the sync version of the API but just double checking if you are using the sync or async version ? If you are using the async version then in that case we do return a 201 immediately and then you can use the status url to poll for the status. I would like to dig in and figure out what's happening here. For the PowerShell Az issue as well - it would be good to know what command you were using/what you were trying to do. We dont support deployment of code using the Functions PowerShell Module (https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/Az.Functions/4.0.3 https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/Az.Functions/4.0....). Did you deploy using AZ CLI and then using the PowerShell Module ? You can either share your Function App info here by using this method: https://github.com/Azure/azure-functions-host/wiki/Sharing-Your-Function-App-name-privately https://github.com/Azure/azure-functions-host/wiki/Sharing-Y... or just email me at anirudhg at microsoft.com and I will look into this. Thanks again for using Functions.
  - mrcartmeneses 4y ago
    Do you have any plans for “easy auth” (that’s what MS support called it despite it not being called that anywhere in the Azure UI or documentation) with azure functions or at least not allowing people to try to set up auth for azure functions when according to your internal support AD-B2C “easy auth” is not compatible? BTW I just want to say that functions kinda work aside from the above issue, but having to write a boot-loader that handles auth, kinda defeats the purpose. Or is it just that AD/B2C is so bad even your support guys don’t know how to set it up? Tried this about 12 months ago so maybe it’s changed in that time but fuck me dead getting auth to work with functions was a pain in the ass and made me swear I’d never touch another azure project again. I don’t think the problem is with Azure Functions per say, every interaction with AD/B2C at every org I’ve worked for that used Azure has been a monumental disaster of poor documentation and excessive complexity. You need a true expert in auth to work with it and even then they will spend half their working life swearing. The auth offerings from Google and AWS just work. AD/B2C is also the biggest problem with teams (I just can’t log in on my machine as I’ve too many accounts for it not to get in a tizzy). I can’t even play minecraft cross platform because of it.
fifticon 4y ago
I can add some salt on azure web apps. I routinely get "everything is wonderful" answers from their weird admin guis, for services that I observe cannot reach their database or even start up. Unless I operate azure from the commandline, the ui is questionable.

I think it's more that your comment is 95% salt and 5% substance an so isn't adding much to the conversation. More details like the connect issue and less "ash and dregs".

iasay 4y ago

I will write up the 30 years of using MSFT stacks and OS up at some point. That’ll be 100% substance. But the salt will have to remain. If you want to see the real MSFT check out the dotnet team handling of the customer demands to remove telemetry. This is on GitHub issues. Or was if they haven’t reorganised all the repos again thus backing up the other schizophrenic donkey comment.

ghuntley 4y ago
See https://isdotnetopen.com https://isdotnetopen.com
- iasay 4y ago
  Well that was an interesting read and entirely unsurprising. I would never consider building a new product on .Net. It’s an insane proposition at this point.

tremon 4y ago

Well, to give just one example: zip deploys (code) to azure functions always return 200 OK, regardless of whether the deployment actually succeeded. To know if the deployment succeeded, you need to use a second API (the kudu mgmt api) to access the text logs, and scan the text logs for errors. Due to our CI infrastructure, we do multiple deploys per day, and I can tell you that most of our deployments require 2-3 attempts to deploy successfully. We have a whole salt mine of workarounds like that in our deployment infrastructure. It's been that way for years. Every now and then, they pull another Microsoft on top of this. The latest that I remember is that even after successful deployment, the function would actually not get activated until you polled its existence using the Az cli tools. We hit that one because we used the Powershell Az module, and of course the cli tools and powershell exercise different code paths :/

smackeyacky 4y ago
Oof. I've come to despise Kudu for these kinds of reasons. We ended up ditching direct zip deployments and now do Docker images, which get pulled automatically using the webhook on the container registry. It is far more reliable and also far easier to integrate into a devops pipeline.
anirudhgarg 4y ago
Hi tremon. I work for the Azure Functions team. Sorry for the trouble. This should not happen. We should be giving you a proper response code when the deployment fails. It looks like you are using the sync version of the API but just double checking if you are using the sync or async version ? If you are using the async version then in that case we do return a 201 immediately and then you can use the status url to poll for the status. I would like to dig in and figure out what's happening here. For the PowerShell Az issue as well - it would be good to know what command you were using/what you were trying to do. We dont support deployment of code using the Functions PowerShell Module (https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/Az.Functions/4.0.3 https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/Az.Functions/4.0....). Did you deploy using AZ CLI and then using the PowerShell Module ? You can either share your Function App info here by using this method: https://github.com/Azure/azure-functions-host/wiki/Sharing-Your-Function-App-name-privately https://github.com/Azure/azure-functions-host/wiki/Sharing-Y... or just email me at anirudhg at microsoft.com and I will look into this. Thanks again for using Functions.
- mrcartmeneses 4y ago
  Do you have any plans for “easy auth” (that’s what MS support called it despite it not being called that anywhere in the Azure UI or documentation) with azure functions or at least not allowing people to try to set up auth for azure functions when according to your internal support AD-B2C “easy auth” is not compatible? BTW I just want to say that functions kinda work aside from the above issue, but having to write a boot-loader that handles auth, kinda defeats the purpose. Or is it just that AD/B2C is so bad even your support guys don’t know how to set it up? Tried this about 12 months ago so maybe it’s changed in that time but fuck me dead getting auth to work with functions was a pain in the ass and made me swear I’d never touch another azure project again. I don’t think the problem is with Azure Functions per say, every interaction with AD/B2C at every org I’ve worked for that used Azure has been a monumental disaster of poor documentation and excessive complexity. You need a true expert in auth to work with it and even then they will spend half their working life swearing. The auth offerings from Google and AWS just work. AD/B2C is also the biggest problem with teams (I just can’t log in on my machine as I’ve too many accounts for it not to get in a tizzy). I can’t even play minecraft cross platform because of it.

fifticon 4y ago

I can add some salt on azure web apps. I routinely get "everything is wonderful" answers from their weird admin guis, for services that I observe cannot reach their database or even start up. Unless I operate azure from the commandline, the ui is questionable.