Support Dynamic Binding scenarios (non .NET languages) #85
Comments
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
|
I just tried and though the propertie is in the bindingData object (checked with Full error stack : |
|
Did some other tests, even if I change the original propertie in bindingData it does not change anything. I think the propertie in |
|
Yeah, you're right, you can't change those values it turns out. So this scenario is not enabled currently I'm afraid. I'll leave this open so we can investigate further. |
|
ATM I'm adding a propertie nameOut to the messages, a bit ugly but it works until the scenario is enabled :) |
|
We should support this soon: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/36428165/generating-names-for-output-blobs-for-an-azure-function |
|
Yes! @paulbatum and I were just having a conversation about that! |
|
It's been on my radar - just haven't had time to finish it. I'll get to it soon. What is @davidebbo's scenario? |
|
My scenario was to add a queue trigger and blob output via the UI (keeping everything default. Then the code has public static void Run(string myQueueItem, TraceWriter log, out string myBlob)
{
myBlob="Hello";
}resulting in: While I now sort of understand why it doesn't work, the error handling made it difficult to figure out. Probably more of a case of needing to improve errors. |
|
For Node.js, the dynamic binding capability will allow the storage account (i.e. the "connection") value to be specified along with the binding, something like the below where the same set of function.json values for a binding are specified: context.bindings.bind({
connection: 'myConnection',
type: 'blob',
path: 'documents/1234'
});However, currently for C#, Our options are either to embrace IBinderEx for these scenarios, or to add a Connection property to all the inbuilt SDK attributes (yuck). Need to gauge how common multi-account IBinder scenarios are for C#. |
|
Just wanted to check in on this feature to see if there was any timetable or workaround? I'm using Node.js and my scenario is pretty simple: taking the canonical image example, I'd like to be able to generate a new thumbnail image that lives in the same container. For example, input image is |
|
@pierre-weceipt could you be more specific on how you got this to work? Thanks! |
|
@jamesdixon To be honest I don't remeber much of these tests. We put aside this project and it's been a while since I worked on this code. After looking at it again, what I understand is that I added a proerty fileNameOut to my message passed to the next queue. Here is an extract of the code, but unless I find some time to rerun in debug mode the whole project I can't explain much more, sorry :( var message = { container: 'fileslist-to-process', fileNameIn: item.fileNameOut, fileNameOut: 'fileName' };
context.done(null, {
blob: blob,
message: message
});and the function.json {
"bindings": [
{
"type": "queueTrigger",
"direction": "in",
"queueName": "tar-to-process"
},
{
"type": "blob",
"name": "blob",
"direction": "out",
"path": "fileslist-to-process/{fileNameOut}"
},
{
"type": "queue",
"name": "message",
"direction": "out",
"queueName": "fileslist-to-process"
}
]
} |
|
We're also interested in dynamic out bindings, but for a slightly different use case. Our preliminary application roadmap has more than 20 functions, all of which can and will be chained together in multiple workflows. There is very little guidance beyond very simple use cases, so the vision we came up with is to use an approach that is rooted in functional programming. We wish to treat each function like a "monad" which will output to one of two associated channels: whether they be Storage Queues, ServiceBus Topics, or EventHubs. One will be for success, the other for fail. This will allow us to build sensible and efficient chains of functions, where each function only executes and processes an input when it has work to do. Currently, the design for chaining functions seems to encourage a pipeline where functions have to receive and analyze input in order to determine whether the previous function was successful, and then have multiple behaviors depending on the content of the input. This does not feel like an efficient paradigm. What our vision would require is to be able to specify "queueName" or the like during execution. Alternatively, we'll just need to skip the output bindings altogether and do everything from within the function. To be honest, it's perfectly reasonable to do it that way, but I thought it was worth bringing up in this thread. |
|
Hello, is there an ETA for this? |
|
Any update? |
|
No update, no ETA. |
mathewc
changed the title
|
If dynamic binding is not yet supported, is it at least possible to determine the name of the file path that is generated for you. IE to log the UUID for the stored blob in a different channel? It seems odd that the feature parity is so distant for javascript bindings. |
|
are dynamic/overridable input bindings supported in Javascript? |
|
Any 2019 updates on this? |
this is how you do this in nodejs (as per the docs). The below assumes you have the binding extensions installed. let's assume your function is an http trigger, send a post request with the body: {
"name" : "yes"
}in function.json {
"name": "InternalBlobReference",
"type": "blob",
"path": "blobpath/{name}.json",
"connection": "AzureWebJobsStorage", //default, tells about the storage account to be used
"direction": "out"
}in index.js module.exports = async function (context, req) {
context.bindings.InternalBlobReference= {"something":"This is dog."}
context.done()
}and you will have the value |
|
Thank you adriennn, Easier dynamic bindings would be a good feature to add into Azure Functions in the future. Basically, any variable set at any time in context should work in {} in the function.json file. Ideally. Thanks! |
|
This may or may not have relevance here, but is there a way to conditionally apply output binding attributes to a function? Let's say I want to output bind to blob storage only if today is Tuesday, or only if some parameter meets some condition? How do I accomplish this? |
|
@alexgman The way you do this is you configure the output binding for blob storage, but then in your code you only assign a value if its tuesday. |
|
I would be so grateful if you could provide an example. Thanks so much.
…On Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 6:38 PM Paul Batum ***@***.***> wrote:
@alexgman <https://github.com/alexgman> The way you do this is you
configure the output binding for blob storage, but then in your code you
only assign a value if its tuesday.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#85 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AECCbzWhCcF7U7Wmh0OoQB_T0T03rZBxks5vbqPXgaJpZM4Hu8UC>
.
|
|
Sure, here's an unmodified code snippet from our reference doc: module.exports = async function(context) {
let retMsg = 'Hello, world!';
context.bindings.httpResponse = {
body: retMsg
};
context.bindings.queueOutput = retMsg;
return;
};Here is a modified version, based on your tuesday rule: module.exports = async function(context) {
let retMsg = 'Hello, world!';
context.bindings.httpResponse = {
body: retMsg
};
if( getToday() == "tuesday") { // getToday is a madeup function, you get the idea
context.bindings.queueOutput = retMsg;
}
return;
}; |
|
Any way you could give one in c#?
…On Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 7:36 PM Paul Batum ***@***.***> wrote:
Sure, here's an unmodified code snippet from our reference doc
<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-functions/functions-reference-node>
:
module.exports = async function(context) {
let retMsg = 'Hello, world!';
context.bindings.httpResponse = {
body: retMsg
};
context.bindings.queueOutput = retMsg;
return;
};
Here is a modified version, based on your tuesday rule:
module.exports = async function(context) {
let retMsg = 'Hello, world!';
context.bindings.httpResponse = {
body: retMsg
};
if( getToday() == "tuesday") { // getToday is a madeup function, you get the idea
context.bindings.queueOutput = retMsg;
}
return;
};
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#85 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AECCb1aOK0fKaGxSV7LKMm34HGhemM4Aks5vbrGfgaJpZM4Hu8UC>
.
|
|
This thread is about non .NET languages. Anyway, just use the same pattern, but with a IAsyncCollector that you only call .AddAsync(...) on if it’s Tuesday.
|
|
Paul,
I'm attempting to use some *out* parameters, and they work AWESOME when I
assign a value to them.
However, when I end up not assigning any value, I am getting the following
error:
Here's the code:
Thanks so much for your help.
…On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 3:34 AM Paul Batum ***@***.***> wrote:
This thread is about non .NET languages. Anyway, just use the same
pattern, but with a IAsyncCollector that you only call .AddAsync(...) on if
it’s Tuesday.
Sent from Outlook
________________________________
From: Alex Gordon ***@***.***>
Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2019 6:23:01 PM
To: Azure/azure-functions-host
Cc: Paul Batum; Mention
Subject: Re: [Azure/azure-functions-host] Support Dynamic Binding
scenarios (non .NET languages) (#85)
Any way you could give one in c#?
On Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 7:36 PM Paul Batum ***@***.***> wrote:
> Sure, here's an unmodified code snippet from our reference doc
> <
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-functions/functions-reference-node
>
> :
>
> module.exports = async function(context) {
> let retMsg = 'Hello, world!';
> context.bindings.httpResponse = {
> body: retMsg
> };
> context.bindings.queueOutput = retMsg;
> return;
> };
>
> Here is a modified version, based on your tuesday rule:
>
> module.exports = async function(context) {
> let retMsg = 'Hello, world!';
> context.bindings.httpResponse = {
> body: retMsg
> };
> if( getToday() == "tuesday") { // getToday is a madeup function, you get
the idea
> context.bindings.queueOutput = retMsg;
> }
> return;
> };
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <
#85 (comment)
>,
> or mute the thread
> <
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AECCb1aOK0fKaGxSV7LKMm34HGhemM4Aks5vbrGfgaJpZM4Hu8UC
>
> .
>
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<
https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FAzure%2Fazure-functions-host%2Fissues%2F85%23issuecomment-478303249&data=02%7C01%7Cpbatum%40microsoft.com%7C3ec3f1a53cdd48c8836a08d6b5776a84%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636895921826040490&sdata=OF1Zl8V1mIdMiyM4tfuch9XTi2i%2Fb1kEsujcYDx6XJk%3D&reserved=0>,
or mute the thread<
https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fnotifications%2Funsubscribe-auth%2FAAApp1n3dkBP7YCZScgMIJOie1zXbto0ks5vcA31gaJpZM4Hu8UC&data=02%7C01%7Cpbatum%40microsoft.com%7C3ec3f1a53cdd48c8836a08d6b5776a84%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636895921826040490&sdata=3sjNPDBRJNWU3j%2FaWbcGECzDL4Tl0DN%2FumRRqztR10U%3D&reserved=0
>.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#85 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AECCb-ckhxvnrJRKfIbQVa5sRYDi9y1qks5vccSfgaJpZM4Hu8UC>
.
|
|
@alexgman I suggest you file a new issue. The images you pasted didn't come through and it really sounds like you're asking something different to what is being discussed here. |
|
Did I misunderstand adriennn's post or is that still a static binding? My use case is unzipping files. I need to unzip, rename, and place in blob storage. Could be anywhere from 1 to 100 files in the zip. |
|
@r-tanner-f it's 'static' within the lifetime of your function as the bindings are defined by the triggers. So in your case, if you have hundreds of files, this means running the same function hundred of times with a single new binding for each file. I wouldn't use the bindings, and not js or java as the files would be handled in-memory. I would do a python function and use the azure blob python sdk to directly read all files paths in the blob and process them one at a time, writing to disk using python and the putting them to the blob again. If you are going to have more files then the function are not a scalable solution. Lastly, a more technical solution would be to use the azure cli to access the blob metadata or files and process the files with linux and put them back to the blob, this however requires a vm. It would be nice if Microsoft developed a CLaaS for Azure (Command Line as a Service). ps. there are lots of talk on the msdn about having a *.file binding, meaning having access to many files with a wildcard match, the solution to this is using the event grid, which brings you back to running the function n times for n files. |
@alexgman I dont know much about c#, but if a function expects a parameter to work then it's gonna throw an error if the parameter is not passed and if its absence is not handled, you need to try catch. |
You could also do this as a build job / pipeline task in Azure DevOps |
|
This seems to be long time around here but, I must ask again since I cannot see an answer for @scottadmi question. Since I cannot find a way to set the output file name is it possible to get the UUID generated so I can pass it forward?. |
|
Any ETA on this? |
|
eta on what? what is your issue?
…On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 6:51 AM MaxHogervorst ***@***.***> wrote:
Any ETA on this?
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#85?email_source=notifications&email_token=ABAIE332E4HNUST3HZJFPJLP3S6CTA5CNFSM4B53YUBKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGODYIICDQ#issuecomment-504398094>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABAIE32GMTFZTPV7FJGLQGTP3S6CTANCNFSM4B53YUBA>
.
|
|
Setting a dynmic name for non .net languages |
Thank you @adriennn . This worked for me. |
|
Any idea on how to use the dynamic naming for multiple blob outputs in the Java functions API, if it is even supported as of yet? I've tried a combination of Thanks :) |
|
So, after 5 years of this issue, there's still no way of doing dynamic bindings with non .NET languages... I'd also like to be able to change the name of the blob I want to output with Node.js. The need to use a random guid makes no sense at all. |
|
I surfed the internet for 2 hours because i didn't think this was not possible, then I stumbled here. |
|
@axof and @Axel92Dev these threads are a bit difficult to navigate but it's indeed possible, there's an example for js see #85 (comment) |
Not at all unfortunately, as in that example, the value of the variable My Azure function is invoked on new message on a Service Bus Subscription, so I cannot invoke it with different parameters. I ended up importing the Azure Blob Storage SDK inside my AF and programmatically store the file customizing whatever I want. |
and others
At first I understood that we could pass somme parameters to the bindings
outinfunction.json({name}is used in your samples) by adding them in the object passed to thedonefunction but it seems that these parameters are taken from the original input message. Do you think it would be possible to use the object passed todoneas parameters for output binding? (could be used to define the blob name, the content, etc)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: