3 ms·
Super helpful feedback @peter. Thanks a ton! I've noted all of these and I'll modify the README to include them. Thank you for taking the time to go through in
by harshadmanglani 3y ago
Super helpful feedback @peter. Thanks a ton!
I've noted all of these and I'll modify the README to include them. Thank you for taking the time to go through in such detail :)
Given that the current state of a workflow:
- is inherently invisible
- all we can really check in the DB is if, for a workflow, the available data contains the target data;
how would I address observability concerns?
This is a function of a lack of workflow states due to the lower levels of abstraction it operates on. User defined workflow states would do the trick, but I suppose that would take writing some more code after integrating the framework.
- peter_l_downs 3y agoI would recommend either updating your framework to allow for instrumentation (logs/metrics/etc) or showing how to add that instrumentation in "user defined workflow states" via an example application. The current pitch, which is "this is a workflow orchestration framework that does not allow for any monitoring or observability" is a complete non-starter. You may want to consider how other projects keep track of workflow state and allow for it to be instrumented.
- harshadmanglani 3y agoFair enough, will do. Thanks!