I have written a web job which will do multiple tasks that run on different schedules like once a day, once in every hour and so and I achieved this by using Timer delegate. Now I am thinking of changing that approach and create a Scheduler job for each scenario. I was able to find some information regarding schedules from googling but was never able to join them to form a flow.
I learned that we can create job collection and each collection can have 'n' jobs based on the pricing tier we are using. After creating a job the program logic that the job must do how can we bind them to the corresponding job?
Also linking jobs to job collection how can I achieve that?
Thanks
A typical workflow is that you would write to a Azure Message Queue with a message, then you would have an Azure Cloud Service that reads from that and does the processing.
To tie specific jobs to specific program logic you can either embed information about the type into the message and have something that generically picks the messages up and turns them into specific operations/classes or you could have behavior specific queues and each job would write to its own queue and you would read from each queue by a different Cloud Service.
I think this will solve my problem either using API calls or queue processing
Solution
If I understand your question, you have a WebJob that has multiple methods, each of which needs to be called on a different schedule. Instead of going through the hassle of setting up a Scheduler and having yet another resource that you have to manage, mark each method you need called with a TimerTriggerAttribute.
Related
We currently run an AWS Lambda function that primarily simply redirects the user to a different URL. The function is invoked via API-Gateway.
For tracking purposes, we would like to create a widget on our dashboard that provides real-time insights into how many redirects are performed each second. The creation of the widget itself is not the problem.
My main question currently is which AWS Services is best suited for telling our other services that an invocation took place. We plan to register the invocation in our database.
Some additional things:
low latency (< 5 seconds) in order to be real-time data
nearly no increased time wait for the user. We aim to redirect the user as fast as possible
Many thanks in advance!
Best Regards
Martin
I understand that your goal is to simply persist the information that an invocation happened somewhere with minimal impact on the response time of the Lambda.
For that purpose I'd probably use an SQS standard queue and just send a message to the queue that the invocation happened.
You can then have an asynchronous process (Lambda, Docker, EC2) process the messages from the queue and update your Dashboard.
Depending on the scalability requirements looking into Kinesis Data Analytics might also be worth it.
It's a fully managed streaming data solution and the analytics part allows you to do sliding window analyses using SQL on data in the Stream.
In that case you'd write the info that something happened to the stream, which also has a low latency.
We are trying the lambda for our ETL job which is written in Clojure.
Our architecture is the scheduler will trigger the parent lambda, then the parent lambda trigger 100 child lambda and counter lambda. The child lambdas after completion of their work it will write the data to s3 . The counter lambda will check the number of files in the S3 , if it is 100 then it will combine all the files and save it to S3, otherwise it will span a new counter lambda and die.
All the positive scenario is working fine, but if any child fails then the counter lambda will end up in the indefinite loop, because there wont be 100 files.
If there any proper way of spanning child lambda, monitor it and if it fails need to restart or retry that alone ?
Is there any good Clojure lambda framework ?
Process monitoring is not built into any lambda clojure libraries that I know of, so for this case I'd recommend taking a page out of the erlang metaphorical play book (supervisor trees) and say that to have a dependable distributed system every actor needs a monitor so a decent approach would be to have a watcher for each lambda task. This can really simplify the error handling cases along the "let it crash" philosophy.
So this would leave you with this list of lambdas:
counters:
a watcher/restarter for the counter (you kind of already have this)
workers x100
supervisors x100
Each supervisor only checks for the presence of one particular file and restarts one particular lambda if it does not exist. this gets much easier if your process is idempotent, so you don't have to worry too much if a file is produced twice, though it's not too hard to check if the lambda a supervisor is watching is still running using the aws api. this supervisor can be started by the thing it's supervising or by the thing that starts the rest of the system, whatever is easier for your codebase. You likely don't need to explicitly start the workers, the supervisor can do that.
The important part is to add cloudwatch or whatever your favourite eventing system is (mine is riemann) so you can add alerts to know when you need to watch the watchers.
There is easy way out there in AWS is called AWS Step Functions. Step Functions provides a graphical console to arrange and visualize the components of your application as a series of steps. Define steps using the AWS Step Functions console or API, a fluent Java API, or AWS CloudFormation templates.
Step makes it simple to orchestrate AWS Lambda functions. Irrespective of language of function, it manages all the lambdas.
Step is good for following use cases
Run sequence functions
Run functions in parallel
Select functions based on data
Retry the functions
try/catch/finally for functions
Running the code for hours
I have an application on an AWS EC2 instance that runs once daily. The application fetches some files from a web service, parses the files line by line, updates a database, updates S3 files based on changes in the database, sends notification emails to customers as well as a few other tasks.
This is a series of logical tasks that must take place in sequence, although some of the tasks can be thought of as sub-tasks that can be executed in parallel. All tasks are a combination of Perl scripts and Java programs, with a single Perl script acting as the manager that executes each in turn. Some tasks can take as long as 45 minutes to complete, and the whole process can take up to 3 hours in total.
I'd like to make this whole process serverless. My initial idea was to use AWS Lambda, whereby each task would execute as a Lambda function, until I discovered Lambda functions impose a 5 minute execution timeout. It seems like the AWS Step Functions service is actually a better fit for my use case, but my understanding is that this service is backed by Lambda, so the tasks will still have the 5 min execution limitation.
(I'm also aware that I would have to re-write my Perl scripts to a language supported by Lambda).
I assume that I can work around the execution time limit by refactoring my code into smaller functions that will guarantee to complete in under 5 minutes. In my particular situation though, this seems inefficient.
Currently the database update task processes lines from a file one at a time. For this to work with Lambda, a Lambda function would need to handle only a single line from the file (or a very small number of lines) in order to guarantee not spilling over 5 minutes execution time. This would involve opening and closing a connection with the database on every invocation of the Lambda function. Also, each line processed should result in an entry written to a file, to be stored in S3. Right now, I just keep a file handle in memory and write the file to S3 when all lines are processed, but with Lambda I would need to keep reading the file, updating it and writing it back to S3.
What I'm asking is:
Is my use case a bad fit for AWS Lambda and/or AWS Step Functions?
Have I misunderstood how these services work?
Is there another AWS service that would be a better fit for my use case?
After further research, I think AWS Batch might be a good idea.
What you want are called Activity Workers. Tl;dr: You register "activities" and each gets an ARN. Then you can put that ARN in the resource field of Task states and then you run some code (the "worker") somewhere (in a Lambda, on EC2, in your basement, wherever) that polls for tasks identified by that ARN, then calls back to report success or failure. Activity Workers can run for up to a year.
Step-by-step details at the AWS docs
In response to RTF's comment, here's a deeper dive: Suppose you have code to color turtles in color_turtles.pl. So what you do is call the CreateActivity API - see http://docs.aws.amazon.com/step-functions/latest/apireference/API_CreateActivity.html - giving the name "ColorTurtles" and it'll give you back an ARN, a string beginning arn:aws... Then in your state machine you make a Task state with that ARN as the value of the resource field. Then you add code to color_turtles.pl to poll the service with http://docs.aws.amazon.com/step-functions/latest/apireference/API_GetActivityTask.html - whenever a machine you're running gets to that task, it'll go look for activity workers polling. It'll give your polling worker the input for the task, then you process the input and generate some output, and call SendTaskSuccess or SendTaskFailure. All these are just REST HTTP calls, so you can run them anywhere and I mean anywhere; in a Lambda, on an EC2 instance, or on some computer anywhere on the Internet.
So to answer your questions:
1) Yeah, if you've got something that'll run for around 45 minutes, whilst you could engineer it with Lambda/Step functions you're probably better off getting a EC2 micro instance.
2)Nope you've pretty much got it.
3) As above you want to go with EC2 for this, there's a good article on using Data Pipelines to start / stop an EC2 instance here that way by starting instance only when you need it the cost(if any) is negligible.
I have jobs that run in this fashion normally you can get away with with a t2.micro instance which is free tier eligible.
You can also run your perl scripts on an EC2 instance so no need to rewrite them!
I will start with that it seems you are looking for workflow solutions on AWS. SWF and Step functions are the two most popular ones. Steps function is more recent offering and encouraged by AWS more than SWF.
SWF has native capability to handle long-running tasks, the downside is that you have to provide your own execution environment for deciders (can't use lambda).
With step functions, you can do this in two different ways. One of the approaches is suggested by Tim in his answer. There is an alternative way to achieve the same which is using job poller in step functions. Job pollers have the ability to call (poll) your resource and find out if the task is done and if not you can send execution in wait mode for the specified time. As mentioned above maximum execution time allowed currently for any workflow is 1 year. In case you have tasks which may take longer than 1 year, you can't use step functions in its current form.
We're trying to move to AWS and to use DynamoDB. It'd be nice to keep everything under DynamoDB so there aren't extraneous types of databases, but aside from half complete research projects I'm not really finding anything to use for a scheduler. There's going to be dynamically set schedules in the range of thousands+, possibly with many running at the same time. For languages, Java or at least JVM would be awesome.
Does anyone know a good Scheduler for DynamoDB or other AWS technology?
---Addendum
When I say scheduler I'm thinking of something all purpose like quartz. I want to set a cron and it runs at that time with the code I give it. This isn't doing some AWS task, this is a task internal to our product. SWF's cron runs inside the VM, so I'm worried what happens when the VM is down. Data Pipeline seems a bit too much. I've been looking into making a dynamodb job store for quartz, consistent read might get around the transaction and consistency issues, but I'm hesitant, might be biting off a lot with a lot of hard to notice problems.
Have you looked at AWS Simple Workflow? You would use the AWS Flow Framework to program against the service, and they have a well documented Java API with lots of samples. They support continuous workflows with timers which you can use to run periodic code (see code example here). I'm using SWF and the Flow Framework for Ruby to run async code that gets kicked off from my main app, and it's been working great.
Another new option for you is to look at AWS Lambda. You can attach your Lambda function code directly to a DynamoDB table update event, and Lambda will spin up and shut down the compute resources for you, without you having to manage a server to run your code. Also, recently, AWS launched the ability to call the Lambda function directly -- e.g. you could have an external timer or other code that triggers the function on a specific schedule.
Lastly, this SO thread may have other options for you to consider.
Another option is to use AWS Lambda Scheduled Functions (newly announced on October 8th 2015 at AWS re:Invent).
Here is a relevant snippet from the blog (source):
Scheduled Functions (Cron)
You can now invoke a Lambda function on a regular, scheduled basis. You can specify a fixed rate (number of minutes, hours, or days between invocations) or you can specify a Cron-like expression:
One of my view functions is a very long processing job and clearly needs to be handled differently.
Instead of making the user wait for long time, it would be best if I were able to lunch the processing job which would email the results, and without waiting for completion notify the user that their request is being processed and let them browse on.
I know I can use os.fork, but I was wondering if there is a 'right way' in terms of Django. Perhaps I can return the HTTP response, and than go on with this job somehow?
There are a couple of solutions to this problem, and the best one depends a bit on how heavy your workload will be.
If you have a light workload you can use the approach used by django-mailer which is to define a "jobs" model, save new jobs into the database, then have cron run a stand-alone script every so often to process the jobs stored in the database (deleting them when done). You can use something like django-chronograph to manage the job scheduling easier
If you need help understanding how to write a script to process the job see James Bennett's article Standalone Django Scripts for help.
If you have a very high workload, meaning you'll need more than a single server to process the jobs, then you want to use a real distribute task queue. There is a lot of competition here so I can't really detail all the options, but a good one to use with for Django apps is celery.
Why not simply start a thread to do the processing and then go on to send the response?
Before you select a solution, you need to determine how the process will be run. I.e is it the same process for every single user, the data is the same and can be scheduled regularly? or does each user request something and the results are slightly different ?
As an example, if the data will be the same for every single user and can be run on a schedule you could use cron.
See: http://www.b-list.org/weblog/2007/sep/22/standalone-django-scripts/
or
http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/howto/custom-management-commands/
However if the requests will be adhoc and you need something scalable that can handle high load and is asynchronous: what you are actually looking for is a message queing system. Your view will add a request to the queue which will then get acted upon.
There are a few options to implement this in Django:
Django Queue service is purely django & python and simple, though the last commit was in April and it seems the project has been abandoned.
http://code.google.com/p/django-queue-service/
The second option if you need something that scales, is distributed and makes use of open source message queing servers: celery is what you need
http://ask.github.com/celery/introduction.html
http://github.com/ask/celery/tree