Question: Support for custom fields in Taskiq Admin middleware JSON payloads

[mikaelsoudev]

Hello!

I'm exploring the use of the Taskiq Admin middleware and noticed that the JSON payloads exchanged with the admin panel are strictly validated against predefined schemas (such as taskName, args, kwargs, etc). Given this, I'd like to ask:

• Is there any plan or openness to allow sending custom fields in these JSON payloads, so users could include additional metadata per task?
• For example, would it make sense to allow custom fields for things like per-task logging, custom tags, or other user-defined information relevant to specific workflows?
• If not currently possible, would a contribution along these lines be welcome? I believe this could help extend the flexibility of Taskiq Admin for more complex or custom use-cases.

If this is something you'd consider, I would be happy to discuss possible approaches or help with a PR. Thanks for your work on this project!

[spikeninja]

Hey! Thank you for your question.

Actually, I was planning to add some flexibility here, but not in a way that is tightly related to taskiq-admin. I mean, I would like to give users the ability to choose the database source on their own. For example, if you don't want to use the taskiq-admin UI and just want to store all the tasks data in your PostgreSQL/MySQL/any other database table or collection, you can use the same middleware but with a different source.

And yes, the fields can be extended.

In the case of using taskiq-admin and allowing users to add new fields, where should they be displayed or located on the page? How can a user set this up?

[spikeninja]

If not currently possible, would a contribution along these lines be welcome? I believe this could help extend the flexibility of Taskiq Admin for more complex or custom use-cases.

Yes, it would, but it can take some time, because now we need to finish other tasks with higher priorities

[mikaelsoudev]

I like the idea of having multiple sources, as it really makes things much more flexible and can also reduce some bottlenecks when sending events (I saw that there was a discussion about something like this, and from what I understand, it was initially resolved with fire and forget).

On the other hand, I think the biggest difference with Taskiq Admin is that it's easy to get started with. You just install it, do some minimal configuration, and you have an interface that's ready to use. I mean, there are several complex and generic solutions like Logfire, Kibana, and Datadog, but none are as simple and specific to Taskiq, and that's what I like most about this project.

The idea of suggesting extra fields would be something very simple initially, focusing first on accepting something as an extra in the payload, saving it, and displaying it on the task details page in a way very similar to how the kwargs field is displayed.

I understand that this is not the focus right now (which is what I imagined, lol), but I would still like to do something along these lines for initial implementation and perhaps open a PR or make it something like an extra package.