Content for the solution pattern #1
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request modifies documentation configuration and content for a solution pattern focused on event mesh architecture for microservices. The changes update multiple configuration files like Changes
Sequence DiagramsequenceDiagram
participant Client
participant EventMesh
participant ServiceA
participant ServiceB
Client->>EventMesh: Send Event
EventMesh->>ServiceA: Route Event
ServiceA-->>EventMesh: Process Complete
EventMesh->>ServiceB: Propagate Event
ServiceB-->>EventMesh: Acknowledge
EventMesh-->>Client: Event Processed
Poem
🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (9)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/index.adoc (4)
11-15: Consider expanding the technical contextWhile the solution description is good, consider adding:
- Brief explanation of what an event mesh is
- Key benefits of using Red Hat Serverless Eventing
24-26: Fix minor typo in the note sectionThere's a minor grammatical issue in the note.
-Solution Patterns help you understand the art of the possible with Red Hat's -portfolio, and not intended to be used as is for production environments. +Solution Patterns help you understand the art of the possible with Red Hat's +portfolio and are not intended to be used as-is for production environments.
31-41: Strong use cases section, consider adding implementation examplesThe use cases are well-defined and relevant. To make it more actionable, consider:
- Adding brief examples for each use case
- Including links to related Red Hat products/solutions
36-39: Consider addressing eventual consistency challengesSince you're discussing consistency in distributed systems and modernizing legacy applications, consider adding:
- Guidance on handling eventual consistency scenarios
- Strategies for managing data consistency across microservices
- Best practices for event-driven system design
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/01-pattern.adoc (3)
7-7: Consider adding link attributes for security and maintenance.The YouTube link should include additional attributes for better security and maintainability.
-The team saw a recent https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rc5IO6S6ZOk[talk on _Event Mesh_]. +The team saw a recent https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rc5IO6S6ZOk[talk on _Event Mesh_, window="_blank", rel="noopener noreferrer"]
26-32: Enhance technical clarity around CQRS implementation.The description of CQRS implementation could be more precise about:
- How commands are specifically translated to events
- The relationship between queries and the event mesh
- The persistence mechanism for events
Consider adding a brief example or diagram to illustrate the flow from CQRS commands to events through the mesh.
22-24: Consider expanding the benefits section.While the current benefits are valid, consider adding specific examples or metrics for each point:
- How the retry mechanisms work
- Types of async workflows supported
- Quantifiable improvements in scalability
documentation/antora.yml (2)
2-2: Fix trailing whitespace.Remove the trailing space after "Event Mesh For Applications".
-title: Event Mesh For Applications +title: Event Mesh For Applications🧰 Tools
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)
[error] 2-2: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
3-3: Consider using a specific version instead of 'master'.Using
masteras a version might cause issues with documentation versioning. Consider using semantic versioning (e.g., '1.0.0') or a more specific branch name.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (7)
dev-site.yml(1 hunks)documentation/antora.yml(1 hunks)documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/01-pattern.adoc(1 hunks)documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/_attributes.adoc(1 hunks)documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/developer-resources.adoc(1 hunks)documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/index.adoc(1 hunks)site.yml(1 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (2)
- documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/_attributes.adoc
- documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/developer-resources.adoc
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)
documentation/antora.yml
[error] 2-2: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
dev-site.yml (1)
7-7: LGTM! Start page update is consistent with site.yml
The change correctly updates the development environment to use the new event mesh documentation as the starting point.
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/index.adoc (1)
1-9: LGTM! Clear and engaging introduction
The title and introduction effectively set the context for the event mesh pattern, highlighting the challenges in application architecture.
| @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ runtime: | |||
| site: | |||
| title: Solution Patterns for Cloud Native Architectures | |||
| url: https://redhat-solution-patterns.github.io/solution-patterns/ | |||
| start_page: solution-pattern-template::index.adoc | |||
| start_page: solution-pattern-event-mesh-for-microservices::index.adoc | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Start page path solution-pattern-event-mesh-for-microservices::index.adoc does not exist
The specified start page path in site.yml points to a non-existent location. The file structure shows only one index.adoc at documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/index.adoc, and no files or directories containing "event-mesh" were found in the repository.
- The start page configuration should be updated to point to an existing documentation file
- Consider either creating the missing documentation structure or updating the start page path to use the existing
ROOT::index.adoc
🔗 Analysis chain
Verify the existence of the new start page
The start page update is consistent with dev-site.yml, but let's verify the path exists.
Let me verify the exact module path structure to ensure we're searching correctly.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Verify the existence of the new start page
fd --type f "index.adoc" documentation/ | grep -q "event-mesh-for-microservices" && echo "Start page exists" || echo "Start page not found"
Length of output: 129
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# First, let's check all index.adoc files to see the module structure
fd --type f "index.adoc" | sort
# Then, let's also check for any files containing "event-mesh" in their path
fd "event-mesh"
Length of output: 91
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🔭 Outside diff range comments (2)
.github/workflows/docs.yml (1)
Line range hint
43-48: Update the github-pages-deploy-action versionThe current version (3.2.1) of JamesIves/github-pages-deploy-action is quite old. Consider updating to the latest stable version.
Apply this diff to update the action:
- - name: Deploy to GitHub Pages - uses: JamesIves/[email protected] + - name: Deploy to GitHub Pages + uses: JamesIves/github-pages-deploy-action@v4🧰 Tools
🪛 actionlint (1.7.4)
10-10: could not parse as YAML: yaml: line 10: did not find expected alphabetic or numeric character
(syntax-check)
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)
[error] 10-10: syntax error: expected alphabetic or numeric character, but found '\n'
(syntax)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/02-architecture.adoc (1)
Line range hint
97-99: Add content to the Technology Stack sectionThis section appears to be a placeholder. Consider adding:
- Detailed version requirements
- Configuration prerequisites
- Integration points between components
- Performance considerations
🧹 Nitpick comments (4)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/01-pattern.adoc (2)
13-14: Consider explaining technical termsTerms like "CQRS" and "Knative's Event Mesh" are introduced without explanation. Consider adding brief definitions or linking to relevant documentation for readers who might be new to these concepts.
26-32: Clear explanation of the technical approach!The progression from CQRS pattern to implementation details is well structured. Consider adding a simple diagram to visualize the event flow from HTTP messages through the Event Mesh.
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/02-architecture.adoc (2)
Line range hint
21-29: Add missing product linksConsider adding links for "Red Hat Application Foundation" and "Kafka Streams" to maintain consistency with other product references.
Line range hint
31-95: Consider AsciiDoc alternatives to HTMLWhile HTML embedding works, consider using native AsciiDoc features where possible for better maintainability and consistency. For example, the
<br>tags could be replaced with{empty}attribute.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
.github/workflows/docs.yml(3 hunks)documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/01-pattern.adoc(1 hunks)documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/02-architecture.adoc(2 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 actionlint (1.7.4)
.github/workflows/docs.yml
10-10: could not parse as YAML: yaml: line 10: did not find expected alphabetic or numeric character
(syntax-check)
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)
.github/workflows/docs.yml
[error] 10-10: syntax error: expected alphabetic or numeric character, but found '\n'
(syntax)
🔇 Additional comments (4)
.github/workflows/docs.yml (2)
33-33: LGTM! Good security practice
The condition to skip deployment on pull requests is a good security practice to prevent unauthorized deployments.
19-19: Verify the stability of GitHub Actions v4
The upgrade to v4 for both checkout and upload-artifact actions is good practice, but let's verify these versions are stable.
Also applies to: 25-28
✅ Verification successful
Based on the API responses, there are several reported issues with both actions/checkout@v4 and actions/upload-artifact@v4. For the checkout action, the latest version (v4.2.2) appears stable with only minor bug reports. However, for upload-artifact@v4, there are multiple significant issues reported:
- Intermittent failures with connection resets and 403 errors
- Issues with Mac runners where uploads stall
- Problems with artifact downloads and merging
- Permission denied errors in some environments
Let's verify if these issues could impact the workflow:
The upgrade to actions/checkout@v4 and actions/upload-artifact@v4 is acceptable for this documentation workflow
The workflow is a simple documentation build and deploy pipeline that:
- Uses upload-artifact to store the generated site
- Has small artifact size (documentation files)
- Runs on ubuntu-latest (not affected by reported Mac runner issues)
- Uses basic artifact operations (no merging or complex patterns)
While there are reported issues with v4, they primarily affect:
- Large artifacts
- Mac runners
- Complex merge operations
- Self-hosted runners
- High-concurrency scenarios
None of these conditions apply to this simple documentation workflow, making the upgrade safe.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check the latest releases and any reported issues for the actions
# Check latest releases for both actions
gh api repos/actions/checkout/releases/latest
gh api repos/actions/upload-artifact/releases/latest
# Check for any recent issues related to v4
gh api search/issues -X GET -f q='repo:actions/checkout is:issue label:bug v4'
gh api search/issues -X GET -f q='repo:actions/upload-artifact is:issue label:bug v4'
Length of output: 67662
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the current workflow file for any potential issues with artifact handling
cat .github/workflows/docs.yml
# Look for any error patterns in other workflow files
fd -e yml -e yaml . .github/workflows/ -x grep -l "upload-artifact"
Length of output: 1474
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/01-pattern.adoc (2)
18-24: Well-structured introduction of core concepts!
Good use of bullet points and emphasis to highlight key benefits. The explanation is clear and concise.
7-7: Consider adding link redundancy
External links like YouTube videos can become unavailable. Consider adding a brief summary of the key points from the video or providing alternative reference materials.
cardil
force-pushed
the
feature/initial-contents
branch
from
e011376 to
99ff3af
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🔭 Outside diff range comments (1)
.github/workflows/docs.yml (1)
Line range hint
45-46: Update the GitHub Pages deploy action versionThe
JamesIves/[email protected]is quite outdated. The latest version includes important security fixes and improvements.Apply this diff:
- - name: Deploy to GitHub Pages - uses: JamesIves/[email protected] + - name: Deploy to GitHub Pages + uses: JamesIves/github-pages-deploy-action@v4
🧹 Nitpick comments (3)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/01-pattern.adoc (1)
13-14: Maintain consistent formatting for technical termsTechnical terms should use consistent formatting. Currently, some terms use italics while others don't.
Apply consistent formatting:
-out they could leverage the _CQRS_ pattern together with _Knative's Event Mesh_ +out they could leverage the _CQRS_ pattern together with _Knative Eventing_ and _Event Mesh_documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/02-architecture.adoc (2)
Line range hint
21-29: Improve technology stack organizationThe technology stack section could be better organized by grouping related technologies and explaining their roles:
Consider this structure:
* Runtime Platform ** Red Hat OpenShift - Container platform providing... * Application Framework ** Quarkus - Cloud-native Java stack for... ** Kafka Streams - Event streaming for... * Data Layer ** PostgreSQL - Primary data store for... * Deployment ** Helm - Package manager for...
Line range hint
35-89: Structure documentation examples sectionWhile the documentation examples are helpful, they would benefit from:
- A brief introduction explaining their purpose
- Example use cases for each formatting type
- Guidelines for when to use each decorator type
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
.github/workflows/docs.yml(3 hunks)documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/01-pattern.adoc(1 hunks)documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/02-architecture.adoc(2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/01-pattern.adoc (1)
7-7: Consider adding video summary or alternative resources
The architecture explanation relies on an external YouTube video which may become unavailable. Consider adding:
- A brief summary of the key points from the video
- Alternative documentation links
✅ Verification successful
Let me check if there are any existing summaries or alternative resources in the documentation.
External video link is sufficiently supported by documentation
The documentation already provides comprehensive coverage of Event Mesh concepts including:
- Clear explanation of the pattern and its benefits
- Detailed implementation using Knative Eventing and CloudEvents
- Practical use cases and architectural considerations
- Alternative resource link to Red Hat's Event Mesh documentation
The external video serves as supplementary content rather than critical documentation, and the core concepts are well-documented within the repository.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if video URL is still accessible
curl -I "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rc5IO6S6ZOk" | head -n 1
Length of output: 475
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for event mesh related content in documentation
rg -i "event mesh" documentation/ -A 5 -B 5
Length of output: 7159
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/02-architecture.adoc (1)
14-19: Expand the CQRS explanation with practical examples
The current CQRS explanation is still minimal. Consider adding:
- Concrete examples of commands and queries in the context of the Cabs system
- Benefits of async commands vs sync queries
- Impact on system reliability and scalability
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
.github/workflows/docs.yml (1)
80-85: Consider updating github-pages-deploy-action version.The action
JamesIves/[email protected]is quite old. Consider updating to the latest version (v4) for security and feature improvements.Apply this diff:
- uses: JamesIves/[email protected] + uses: JamesIves/github-pages-deploy-action@v4 with: - GITHUB_TOKEN: "${{ github.token}}" - FOLDER: "${{ env.SITE_DIR }}/${{ env.PR_PATH }}" - BRANCH: "gh-pages" - COMMIT_MESSAGE: "[CI] Publish Preview for PR #${{ github.event.number }}" + token: "${{ github.token}}" + folder: "${{ env.SITE_DIR }}/${{ env.PR_PATH }}" + branch: "gh-pages" + commit-message: "[CI] Publish Preview for PR #${{ github.event.number }}"
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
.github/workflows/docs.yml(4 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 actionlint (1.7.4)
.github/workflows/docs.yml
70-70: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2086:info:1:132: Double quote to prevent globbing and word splitting
(shellcheck)
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)
.github/workflows/docs.yml
[error] 51-51: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
[error] 96-96: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
[error] 98-98: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
[error] 100-100: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
🔇 Additional comments (3)
.github/workflows/docs.yml (3)
20-20: LGTM! Good job updating the action versions.
The updates to actions/checkout@v4 and actions/upload-artifact@v4 follow best practices by using the latest stable versions.
Also applies to: 26-26
34-34: LGTM! Good separation of concerns.
The condition if: github.event_name != 'pull_request' correctly prevents production deployments from PR builds, and the action version updates are appropriate.
Also applies to: 37-37, 39-39
52-101: LGTM! Well-structured preview deployment.
The preview deployment job is well-organized with clear steps:
- PR comment management
- Preview URL setup
- Deployment
- Status updates
This provides good visibility of the preview deployment process to PR authors.
🧰 Tools
🪛 actionlint (1.7.4)
70-70: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2086:info:1:132: Double quote to prevent globbing and word splitting
(shellcheck)
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)
[error] 96-96: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
[error] 98-98: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
[error] 100-100: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
cardil
force-pushed
the
feature/initial-contents
branch
from
07b594c to
00ea7d9
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 3
🔭 Outside diff range comments (1)
.github/workflows/docs.yml (1)
Use v0.2.4 instead of master branch for antora-site-action
Update the antora-site-action version from
mastertov0.2.4for better stability and security. Using a specific version tag instead of tracking the master branch helps prevent unexpected changes and ensures reproducible builds.uses: kameshsampath/[email protected]🔗 Analysis chain
Line range hint
22-24: Verify antora-site-action versionWhile the checkout and artifact actions have been updated to v4, the antora-site-action is still using the master branch. Consider using a specific version tag for better stability and security.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check latest release of antora-site-action gh api repos/kameshsampath/antora-site-action/releases/latest --jq .tag_nameLength of output: 85
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
.github/workflows/docs.yml(4 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 actionlint (1.7.4)
.github/workflows/docs.yml
70-70: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2086:info:1:132: Double quote to prevent globbing and word splitting
(shellcheck)
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)
.github/workflows/docs.yml
[error] 51-51: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
[error] 96-96: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
[error] 98-98: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
[error] 100-100: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
.github/workflows/docs.yml (2)
8-10: Fix the YAML syntax error in the pull request trigger
The wildcard pattern * needs to be quoted to be treated as a string literal in YAML.
70-70: Fix potential word splitting in shell command
The BASE_URL environment variable setting could be more robust.
🧰 Tools
🪛 actionlint (1.7.4)
70-70: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2086:info:1:132: Double quote to prevent globbing and word splitting
(shellcheck)
cardil
force-pushed
the
feature/initial-contents
branch
2 times, most recently
from
11cf61e to
db8bcc4
Compare
cardil
force-pushed
the
feature/initial-contents
branch
from
db8bcc4 to
c47809e
Compare
cardil
force-pushed
the
feature/initial-contents
branch
from
c47809e to
059d06a
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
♻️ Duplicate comments (2)
.github/workflows/docs.yml (2)
8-10:⚠️ Potential issueFix the YAML syntax error in the pull request trigger
The wildcard pattern
*needs to be quoted to be treated as a string literal in YAML.Apply this diff to fix the syntax:
pull_request: branches: - - * + - '*'
69-69: 🛠️ Refactor suggestionFix potential word splitting in shell command
The BASE_URL environment variable setting could be more robust.
Apply this diff:
- run: echo "BASE_URL=https://${{ github.repository_owner }}.github.io/${{ github.event.repository.name }}/${{ env.PR_PATH }}/" >> $GITHUB_ENV + run: echo "BASE_URL=https://${GITHUB_REPOSITORY_OWNER}.github.io/${GITHUB_REPOSITORY#*/}/${PR_PATH}/" >> "$GITHUB_ENV"🧰 Tools
🪛 actionlint (1.7.4)
69-69: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2086:info:1:125: Double quote to prevent globbing and word splitting
(shellcheck)
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
.github/workflows/docs.yml (1)
94-101: Clean up trailing whitespace in comment templateThere are trailing spaces in the comment template that should be removed for consistency.
Apply this diff:
message: | A preview of ${{ github.event.after }} is uploaded and can be seen here: - + ✨ ${{ env.BASE_URL }} ✨ - + Changes may take a few minutes to propagate. - + The source is here: https://github.com/${{ github.repository }}/tree/gh-pages/${{ env.PR_PATH }}/🧰 Tools
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)
[error] 96-96: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
[error] 98-98: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
[error] 100-100: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
.github/workflows/docs.yml(3 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 actionlint (1.7.4)
.github/workflows/docs.yml
69-69: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2086:info:1:125: Double quote to prevent globbing and word splitting
(shellcheck)
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)
.github/workflows/docs.yml
[error] 50-50: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
[error] 96-96: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
[error] 98-98: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
[error] 100-100: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
.github/workflows/docs.yml (2)
20-20: LGTM! Good job updating to the latest action versions
The updates to checkout@v4 and upload-artifact@v4 are good practices for security and features.
Also applies to: 26-29
35-35: LGTM! Well-structured deployment configuration
Good practices observed:
- Proper condition to prevent deployment on pull requests
- Updated to latest action versions
- Well-configured deployment parameters
Also applies to: 38-38, 40-49
cardil
force-pushed
the
feature/initial-contents
branch
from
059d06a to
409c04a
Compare
|
🪓 PR closed, deleted preview at https://github.com/cardil/solution-pattern-event-mesh-for-microservices/tree/gh-pages/pull-1 |
cardil
force-pushed
the
feature/initial-contents
branch
from
409c04a to
6d27e85
Compare
cardil
force-pushed
the
feature/initial-contents
branch
from
6d27e85 to
d175868
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
♻️ Duplicate comments (1)
.github/workflows/docs.yml (1)
8-10:⚠️ Potential issueFix the YAML syntax error in the pull request trigger
The wildcard pattern
*needs to be quoted to be treated as a string literal in YAML.
🧹 Nitpick comments (3)
.github/workflows/docs.yml (3)
32-36: Consider restricting permissionsThe current permissions block grants more access than needed. The
repository-projectsandid-tokenpermissions don't appear to be used in this job.Consider limiting to only required permissions:
permissions: contents: write pull-requests: write
57-61: Optimize permissions for preview jobSimilar to the deploy job, some permissions appear unnecessary for the preview deployment.
Consider limiting to only required permissions:
permissions: contents: write pull-requests: write
69-111: Consider using environment variables for repeated valuesThe PR number and repository information are used multiple times in the workflow. Consider defining them as environment variables at the job level to improve maintainability.
env: PR_PATH: pull-${{ github.event.number }} PR_NUMBER: ${{ github.event.number }} REPO: ${{ github.repository }}🧰 Tools
🪛 actionlint (1.7.4)
79-79: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2086:info:1:125: Double quote to prevent globbing and word splitting
(shellcheck)
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)
[error] 106-106: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
[error] 108-108: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
[error] 110-110: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
.github/workflows/docs.yml(2 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 actionlint (1.7.4)
.github/workflows/docs.yml
79-79: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2086:info:1:125: Double quote to prevent globbing and word splitting
(shellcheck)
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)
.github/workflows/docs.yml
[error] 55-55: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
[error] 106-106: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
[error] 108-108: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
[error] 110-110: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
.github/workflows/docs.yml (1)
Line range hint 17-30: LGTM! Good job updating to latest stable versions
The updates to use ubuntu-24.04 runner and v4 of the actions are good practices.
cardil
force-pushed
the
feature/initial-contents
branch
from
15b4ee9 to
7f6da47
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🔭 Outside diff range comments (1)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/02-architecture.adoc (1)
Line range hint
33-108: Replace placeholder content with actual architecture documentationThe current content focuses on AsciiDoc formatting examples rather than documenting the event mesh architecture. Consider:
- Adding actual architecture diagrams showing the event mesh topology
- Documenting the event flow between services
- Describing the event mesh components and their configurations
- Providing real-world examples of service integration
Would you like help in structuring the architecture documentation with a focus on event mesh patterns and practices?
♻️ Duplicate comments (1)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/02-architecture.adoc (1)
14-19: 🛠️ Refactor suggestionExpand the CQRS explanation with practical details
The current explanation remains brief. Consider enhancing it with:
- Concrete examples of commands and queries in an event mesh context
- Explanation of why commands are async and queries are sync
- Benefits of this architectural separation
The solution employs Command Query Responsibility Segregation (CQRS) to separate commands and queries: -Commands are modeled as asynchronous events and handled by the event mesh. +Commands (write operations) are modeled as asynchronous events and handled by the event mesh. For example: +* Creating a new order (OrderCreated event) +* Updating inventory (InventoryUpdated event) +These operations are async to ensure system resilience and scalability. -Queries are synchronous operations safe to retry. +Queries (read operations) are synchronous REST/GraphQL calls that are safe to retry. For example: +* Fetching order status +* Checking current inventory levels +This separation allows for: +* Independent scaling of read and write workloads +* Optimized data models for each operation type +* Better system resilience through event-driven architecture
🧹 Nitpick comments (4)
documentation/antora.yml (1)
2-2: Fix trailing whitespace.Remove the trailing space at the end of line 2.
-title: Event Mesh For Applications +title: Event Mesh For Applications🧰 Tools
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)
[error] 2-2: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/index.adoc (1)
24-26: Fix grammar in the note section.There's a grammatical error in the note text.
-Solution Patterns help you understand the art of the possible with Red Hat's -portfolio, and not intended to be used as is for production environments. +Solution Patterns help you understand the art of the possible with Red Hat's +portfolio, and are not intended to be used as is for production environments.documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/01-pattern.adoc (1)
18-32: Consider adding reference links for technical terms.The technical explanation is clear and accurate. Consider adding reference links for technical terms to help readers:
-using the _CQRS_ pattern to identify _Commands_ from _Queries_ +using the link:https://martinfowler.com/bliki/CQRS.html[CQRS] pattern to identify _Commands_ from _Queries_Also consider adding links for:
- CloudEvents specification
- Knative Eventing documentation
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/02-architecture.adoc (1)
Line range hint
21-31: Enhance technology stack section with versions and descriptionsConsider improving this section by:
- Adding version information for critical components
- Including links for all products (Red Hat Application Foundation is missing a link)
- Adding brief descriptions of each component's role in the event mesh architecture
* Red Hat supported products -** https://www.redhat.com/en/technologies/cloud-computing/openshift[Red Hat OpenShift] -** Red Hat Application Foundation +** https://www.redhat.com/en/technologies/cloud-computing/openshift[Red Hat OpenShift] 4.13+ - Container platform for hosting services +** https://www.redhat.com/en/products/application-foundations[Red Hat Application Foundation] - Framework for cloud-native development *** https://access.redhat.com/products/quarkus[Quarkus] *** https://www.redhat.com/en/technologies/cloud-computing/openshift/openshift-streams-for-apache-kafka[Kafka Streams] * Other open source products: -** https://www.postgresql.org/[PostgreSQL database] -** https://helm.sh/[Helm] +** https://www.postgresql.org/[PostgreSQL database] 15+ - Event store and read models +** https://helm.sh/[Helm] 3.x - Package manager for Kubernetes deployments
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (8)
dev-site.yml(1 hunks)documentation/antora.yml(1 hunks)documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/01-pattern.adoc(1 hunks)documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/02-architecture.adoc(2 hunks)documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/_attributes.adoc(1 hunks)documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/developer-resources.adoc(1 hunks)documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/index.adoc(1 hunks)site.yml(1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (4)
- documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/_attributes.adoc
- site.yml
- documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/developer-resources.adoc
- dev-site.yml
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)
documentation/antora.yml
[error] 2-2: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
🔇 Additional comments (4)
documentation/antora.yml (1)
1-2: LGTM! Configuration changes align with the solution pattern focus.
The name and title updates accurately reflect the event mesh for microservices focus.
🧰 Tools
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)
[error] 2-2: trailing spaces
(trailing-spaces)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/index.adoc (1)
7-41: LGTM! Well-structured content with clear value proposition.
The introduction effectively presents the problem space and solution. The use cases are well-defined and relevant to the target audience. The content maintains a good balance between technical depth and accessibility.
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/01-pattern.adoc (1)
3-14: LGTM! Effective use of narrative to introduce technical concepts.
The story effectively introduces the problem space and motivation for adopting event mesh architecture.
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/02-architecture.adoc (1)
Line range hint 1-5: LGTM! Document header is well-structured
The title accurately reflects the focus on event mesh architecture, and the AsciiDoc attributes are properly configured.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (4)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/03-demo.adoc (3)
25-51: Java Anti-Example Code Clarity
The anti-pattern example using thecompleteTransitmethod is well annotated with inline markers (e.g.<1>,<2>), which help to pinpoint the issues such as the misuse of the@Transactionalannotation and the merging of unrelated business domains. Ensure that this commentary remains consistent with the overarching narrative and that readers can clearly distinguish between what is being demonstrated as problematic versus what needs to be refactored.
150-171: Rust Route Handling and Event Dispatch
The snippet that defines HTTP route handling for receiving events in the Rust service is clear and concise. The match statement on the event type effectively routes requests, which is central to the event-driven design. A brief inline comment on handling unsupported event types could further enhance clarity, though it is not mandatory.
494-501: Conclusion and UML Diagram Integration
The conclusion effectively summarizes the refactored flow, and the embedded PlantUML diagram provides a strong visual aid. Consider adding a brief caption below the diagram to explain key components for readers who may not be as familiar with UML notation.documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/02-architecture.adoc (1)
151-157: Exponential Backoff and Dead Letter Sink Notes
The explanation of the exponential backoff strategy and the mention of a configurable dead letter sink are valuable additions. Providing links or references to more detailed Knative documentation on these topics could further benefit readers.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/02-architecture.adoc(1 hunks)documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/03-demo.adoc(2 hunks)documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/developer-resources.adoc(1 hunks)documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/index.adoc(1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/developer-resources.adoc
🔇 Additional comments (28)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/03-demo.adoc (8)
1-12: Title and Introduction Update
The revised title “Building Apps around the Event Mesh” immediately communicates the new focus of the solution pattern. The introductory lines (10–12) clearly set the stage by introducing the Cabs ride-sharing example in a relatable manner. Overall, the updated copy meets the PR objective of emphasising event mesh architecture.
54-60: Caution Section on Transactional Overuse
The caution block effectively summarizes the issues inherent in overreliance on transactional processing and blending of business concerns. The annotations in this section (e.g. “<1>”, “<2>”) reinforce the warnings. Consider a minor editorial pass for tone consistency versus the earlier explanatory sections.
111-138: Rust Fee Calculation Implementation
The Rust code block that implements the fee calculation is detailed and well-structured. It clearly shows how the event is parsed, processed, and then re-wrapped for delivery, offering a robust contrast to the earlier Java anti-example. This inclusion aligns nicely with the strategy to demonstrate multiple technology approaches within an event mesh context.
257-273: Legacy Java Refactoring for Event-Driven Processing
The updated legacy code clearly separates the logic for calculating driver fees and handling events via@EventListener. The changes emphasize asynchronous processing, which helps decouple legacy transactional operations from modern, event-driven handling. The inline notes (<1>, <2>, <3>) further clarify the intended behavior.
291-353: CloudEvent Sender Implementation
The implementation of theDriverFeeServiceandCloudEventSenderclasses is straightforward. The code effectively converts an event into a CloudEvent and sends it using an HTTP client with proper error mapping to internal server errors. The use of logging helps in troubleshooting and the overall design adheres to our event mesh strategy.
362-391: CloudEvent Receiver Handling
The CloudEvent receiver code is well written. It iterates over a list of converters to match and unwrap the incoming event, then publishes it using the framework’s event infrastructure. The fallback of throwing anIllegalStateExceptionif no match is found is appropriate for ensuring clear failure modes.
412-424: YAML Configuration for SinkBindings
The SinkBinding YAML blocks correctly bind the sources (services) to the Knative Broker. Please verify that the referenced namespaces and resource names match those deployed in the environment; otherwise, the instructions are clear and consistent with the event mesh design.Also applies to: 431-442
455-489: YAML Configuration for Triggers
The Trigger configurations use clear event filters (e.g.type: cabs.drivers.calculate-fee) to route events appropriately. Ensure that the event type values here match those used elsewhere in the documentation and in the code examples to prevent confusion.documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/index.adoc (6)
1-7: Updated Title and Home Layout
The title “Building Apps around the Event Mesh” immediately repositions the document’s focus, and the homepage configuration (lines 1–7) is now more aligned with the event mesh narrative.
7-16: Introduction and Link Integration
The introductory section now clearly discusses the challenges of application architecture along with concrete examples. The embedded links to Red Hat OpenShift Serverless and Event Mesh provide valuable context. Please verify that these links remain up-to-date as external resources.
17-18: Contributors Section Update
Updating the contributor credit to “Chris Suszynski” with an associated GitHub link personalizes the document. This change adds credibility; just double-check that the link is valid.
22-27: Notes on Production Readiness
The note section clearly sets expectations about production usage and the role of solution patterns. The formatting using blocks (lines 22–27) is clean and accessible, aiding in immediate comprehension.
28-42: Expanded Use Cases Section
The expanded use case section now provides concrete examples of how event mesh architecture can enhance consistency, modernize legacy systems, and facilitate external communications. This addition strongly supports the PR’s objectives.
43-44: Inclusion of Additional Documentation
Including the directiveinclude::01-pattern.adoc[]helps modularize the documentation. Ensure that the referenced file is updated to reflect the new event mesh focus so the content remains consistent across the board.documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/02-architecture.adoc (14)
1-5: Title and Metadata Update
The title and associated metadata now reflect the new focus on event mesh architecture. This change is consistent with the overall theme and serves as a clear signal to the reader.
6-12: Architecture Introduction
The opening description (lines 6–12) effectively contrasts traditional transactional design with an eventual consistency model. This clear exposition provides the necessary foundation for the detailed sections that follow.
13-32: Technology Stack Section
The Technology Stack is now more comprehensive and includes well-formatted links to key technologies such as Red Hat OpenShift, Knative, and Strimzi. Verifying these links for accuracy will ensure that readers access the correct resources.
33-41: In-Depth Architecture Overview
The "An in-depth look at the solution's architecture" section provides valuable context on modularization and asynchronous processing. It lays a solid foundation for readers seeking to understand the benefits of an event mesh approach.
41-49: Problem Analysis Explanation
Introducing the “Problem Analysis” section distinctly explains the shortcomings of strict transactional systems. This discussion is clear and effectively motivates the need for an event mesh solution.
50-60: Solution Breakdown Clarity
The “Solution Breakdown” section breaks down complex architecture topics like CQRS, asynchronous command processing, and event persistence into digestible parts. This aligns well with our objective of clarifying the role of the event mesh.
83-99: Event Mesh Flow Description
The step-by-step explanation of the event flow is comprehensive and practical. It details how an HTTP request is processed, how acknowledgments (202 Accepted) are returned, and how events are routed—all of which enhance the reader’s understanding of end-to-end behavior.
105-137: UML Diagram Integration
The PlantUML block is a strong visual aid that summarizes the architecture. The diagram’s theme and structure contribute to understanding the overall event routing and microservices interaction. Consider adding a caption to the diagram for additional context.
159-168: Work Ledger Analogy
The “Work Ledger” analogy is an effective metaphor that simplifies the technical concept of event processing. It makes the idea more accessible, especially for readers new to event-driven architectures.
169-180: Differences from Event Sourcing
The section neatly distinguishes the event mesh pattern from Event Sourcing. This clarification is important to avoid common misconceptions and helps readers understand the temporary nature of event storage.
181-191: Differences from Service Mesh
The provided table clearly outlines the differences between synchronous service mesh communication and the asynchronous event mesh model. Ensure the table formatting renders correctly in the final output.
220-231: Supporting Legacy Systems
The discussion on how legacy systems can be integrated via lightweight adapters is both practical and clear. This section successfully bridges older architectures with modern event-driven practices.
232-238: Improving Resilience in Applications
The narrative that replacing synchronous, transactional calls with asynchronous event-driven communication enhances system resilience is compelling and well-supported by examples.
241-256: More about the Technology Stack
The final section reinforces the benefits of standards such as CloudEvents, which aid in testing and reduce vendor lock-in. This clarity ensures that the technical audience understands the low-friction integration of the event mesh with existing tools.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/02-architecture.adoc (1)
153-159: Exponential Backoff Explanation
The NOTE on the exponential backoff algorithm is informative. To improve clarity, consider formatting the formula using inline code formatting (for example,backoffDelay * 2^(numberOfRetries)) instead of using plus signs, which may be misinterpreted.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/01-pattern.adoc(1 hunks)documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/02-architecture.adoc(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (23)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/01-pattern.adoc (4)
3-5: Narrative Context Enhancement
The revised introduction effectively sets the stage by introducing the fictional transportation company “Cabs” and describing its past struggles with a transactional monolith. This concise context primes readers for the subsequent discussion on modernization and event mesh architecture.
7-12: Enhanced External References
The added references—a YouTube talk on Event Mesh and Fowler’s explanation of CQRS—enrich the narrative. These external resources provide valuable context and further reading for interested users. Ensure that the link formatting remains consistent and accessible for all readers.
16-22: Clear Description of the Event Mesh Solution
This section clearly outlines the core capabilities of the event mesh by describing its role in routing, retrying, and processing asynchronous events. The bullet points succinctly capture the key benefits, making it easy for readers to grasp the advantages of this approach.
23-28: Detailed Process Explanation
The explanation of how the Cabs engineering team leverages the CQRS pattern, along with the use of CloudEvents for proper event serialization, is clear and informative. This section successfully ties together the rationale behind the event mesh approach with its practical implementation details.documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/02-architecture.adoc (19)
1-1: Updated Title for Clarity
The new title, “Building Apps around the Event Mesh,” immediately refocuses the document on the event mesh architecture. This update sets a clear expectation for the reader regarding the content of the document.
8-11: Clear Introduction to Event Mesh Architecture
The introductory remarks (lines 8–11) effectively describe the paradigm shift from traditional transactional systems toward an eventual consistency model. This clear exposition lays a solid groundwork for the more detailed sections that follow.
16-16: Introduction to the Technology Stack
The brief preamble introducing the technology stack is concise and sets up the detailed list that follows. It helps readers understand that the solution is grounded in a well-defined set of technologies.
16-32: Comprehensive Technology Stack Section
The technology stack section now offers a well-structured list of technologies with concise descriptions and direct external links. This detailed list bolsters credibility by grounding the solution in real, supported products. Please double-check that punctuation and dash formatting are consistent throughout the list for optimal readability.
38-42: Insightful Architecture Overview
The “An in-depth look at the solution's architecture” section provides a clear overview of how the event mesh approach applies to both new and legacy systems. This introduction successfully highlights benefits such as modularity and improved responsiveness.
43-51: Clear Problem Analysis
The “Problem Analysis” section succinctly explains the shortcomings of traditional transactional models and reinforces why an event-driven approach is preferable. The real-world example (e.g., ride-sharing event capture) makes the discussion tangible and relatable.
52-62: Effective Solution Breakdown
The “Solution Breakdown” section clearly delineates how the event mesh integrates with the CQRS pattern, separating asynchronous commands from synchronous queries. The explanation is both structured and accessible—consider adding concrete examples in future iterations for even more clarity.
63-64: Resilience and Retry Strategy Explanation
The description of the built-in retry strategies (linear or exponential backoff) delivers an important insight into the system’s resilience. This clear explanation underpins the overall benefits of the event mesh approach.
66-84: Comprehensive Benefits Summary
The detailed bullet list covering service decomposition, improved business alignment, enhanced resilience, and superior performance is comprehensive and well-formatted. Each point clearly underscores a key architectural benefit, making the advantages of the event mesh readily apparent.
87-100: Detailed Event Mesh Flow
The step-by-step flowchart explains the lifecycle of an event—from initial HTTP receipt to eventual processing and automatic retries. The numbered list makes it easy to follow. A minor suggestion: consider clarifying “increasing pauses” to “increasing pause durations” to enhance precision.
104-140: Comprehensive Diagram Inclusion
The inclusion of a PlantUML diagram is a great visual aid that reinforces the textual explanation of the event flow. This diagram effectively illustrates the interactions between microservices, the event mesh, and data stores.
143-152: Useful TIP Section
The TIP section emphasizes that the applications do not need to pull events from the queue because the event mesh controls the flow. This is a practical and reassuring note for readers unfamiliar with the intricacies of event-driven architectures.
161-167: Engaging Work Ledger Analogy
The “Work Ledger analogy” is an engaging way of relating the event mesh workflow to a familiar process, helping demystify the concept for non-expert readers. This analogy is both intuitive and effective in conveying the transient nature of event persistence.
171-182: Clear Distinction from Event Sourcing
By differentiating Event Mesh from Event Sourcing, this section dispels common misconceptions and highlights the key operational advantages of the proposed approach. The explanation is clear and valuable for understanding the decision rationale.
186-193: Differentiation from Service Mesh
This section concisely outlines the contrasts between the Service Mesh and Event Mesh patterns. The explanation helps readers understand that while both improve resilience, they target different aspects of application communication and behavior.
195-221: Detailed Comparison Table
The comparison table effectively summarizes the key differences between Service Mesh and Event Mesh. Its structured format aids comprehension; however, please verify that the column formatting remains consistent for optimal clarity.
222-233: Effective Legacy Systems Integration
The “Supporting Legacy Systems” section offers practical examples of how legacy applications can be integrated into an event mesh without major refactoring. This incremental approach is well explained and provides reassurance to readers looking to modernize existing infrastructure.
234-242: Resilience Benefits Clarified
The discussion on “Improving Resilience in Applications” clearly outlines how asynchronous, event-driven communication reduces dependency risks and enhances overall system stability. This section successfully links technical benefits to real-world operational improvements.
243-258: Expanded Technology Stack Context
The “More about the Technology Stack” section reinforces the advantages of using standard protocols like CloudEvents over HTTP REST, emphasizing vendor neutrality and simplified testing. This additional context solidifies the argument for the chosen technology approach.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (5)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/03-demo.adoc (3)
16-20: "IMPORTANT" Block for the Initial Application
The block emphasizes that the presented example is suboptimal (a counterexample). Ensure that if there are any placeholder texts in future iterations, they are replaced with content that details the intended learning outcomes.
83-92: Discussion on Bundling of Logical Domains
The explanation correctly highlights how merging unrelated business domains into a single method can become problematic. Consider adding a brief example or a pointer to later sections for readers who might want more details.
103-111: Drivers Module – Introduction & Minor Typos
The section introduces the drivers module as a candidate for extraction into its own service.
- Note the typo “staring point” on line 105—it should be “starting point”.
Would you like a diff suggestion for this typo?
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/02-architecture.adoc (2)
85-102: Event Mesh Flow Description
The step-by-step flow is highly illustrative. A minor nitpick: in step 2, consider rephrasing “persists safely” to “safely persists” for improved readability.Would you like a diff suggestion for this minor wording adjustment?
182-188: Differences from Service Mesh & Comparison Table
The “Differences from the Service Mesh” section and the accompanying table aim to contrast synchronous and asynchronous paradigms.
A couple of points:
- Verify that the table columns and formatting correctly render in the final output.
- The table headings and entries (“2+a” and “a”) might benefit from clearer labeling if they are not rendered as intended.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/02-architecture.adoc(1 hunks)documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/03-demo.adoc(2 hunks)documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/developer-resources.adoc(1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/developer-resources.adoc
🔇 Additional comments (44)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/03-demo.adoc (27)
1-5: Document Title & Header Configuration
The title “Building Apps around the Event Mesh” and document attributes (sectnums, sectlinks, doctype) create a clear context for the demo.
10-12: Introduction of the Demo Example
The introductory lines clearly state the purpose of the example—a Cabs ride-sharing application built on a popular Java framework. This sets the reader’s expectations well.
25-52: Java Method “completeTransit” Example
The code snippet demonstrates a complex method that handles ride completion and interleaves multiple business operations. A couple of points to consider:
- The inline note
<1>refers to the use of the+@Transational+annotation. Verify that the intended annotation is correctly spelled (the code uses@Transactional), and update the inline comment if needed.- The method bundles several operations (data persistence, fee calculation, event publishing) which exemplifies the pitfalls discussed later.
This snippet effectively supports the ensuing discussion on refactoring.
67-75: Explanation on Overuse of Transactional Processing
This section explains the limitations of relying too heavily on transactions. The content is clear and educational.
93-100: Introduction to the Refactoring Section
The refactoring section sets the stage by explaining that the driver fee calculation will be shifted to an asynchronous process via the Event Mesh. The narrative is clear and helps link the observed issues to the proposed solution.
112-143: Rust Code for Fee Calculation
The provided Rust snippet is concise and demonstrates unwrapping a Cloud Event, fee calculation, event wrapping, and sending. The inline annotations (<1>–<4>) are helpful.
145-151: Explanation of the Rust Code Behavior
The bullet points that follow clearly explain what each numbered annotation in the Rust code corresponds to. This clarity aids understanding and is well written.
152-176: Rust HTTP Listener for Event Routing
The listener code sample shows how to map HTTP requests to service methods based on event type. The simple switch mechanism is acceptable for demonstration purposes, although in a production system a more scalable routing solution might be warranted.
178-182: Simple Routing Note
The NOTE block correctly cautions that a simple switch statement is used. It might be beneficial to mention that more sophisticated routing logic could be introduced as needed.
184-217: Cloud Event Sender Implementation in Rust
The Rust implementation for sending Cloud Events is clear. It demonstrates converting an event, building the CloudEvent, and sending it over HTTP. The inline note (<1>) highlighting the HTTP POST usage is useful.
218-221: CAUTION on Retry Policy in the Broker
The cautionary note effectively alerts readers to the operational consequences of the configured retry policy (exponential backoff with ten retries).
223-227: Dead Letter Sink Note
This block explains the possibility of configuring a dead letter sink to handle failed deliveries. The explanation is clear and adds valuable context regarding system recovery.
229-252: Legacy Application Changes – Java Snippet
The legacy Java code snippet shows how the application shifts from bundled operations to an approach where fee calculation is handled asynchronously. The inline note (<1>) is helpful.
253-260: Explanation of Legacy Application Adjustments
The accompanying NOTE explains the asynchronous nature of the fee calculation and the use of@EventListenerfor receiving events. The details provided ensure that readers understand the separation of concerns.
262-264: Introduction to Cloud Event Sender for Legacy Integration
The brief introduction reiterates the need to communicate with the Event Mesh via Cloud Events, serving as a transition to the upcoming code snippet.
265-332: CloudEventSender and DriverFeeService – Java Implementation
The Java snippet for theDriverFeeServiceandCloudEventSenderis comprehensive and well formatted. One suggestion: ensure that the helper methodcreateMessageWriter(http)is defined elsewhere or referenced appropriately.
334-335: Simplified HTTP Client Reminder
The reminder that the implementation is a basic HTTP client reinforces the educational intent of the documentation.
338-368: Legacy HTTP Listener – CloudEventReceiver
The CloudEventReceiver code is clear and correctly demonstrates receiving a Cloud Event and propagating it through the application. The inline explanations (<1> and <2>) provide additional clarity.
379-403: Wiring the Event Mesh – Broker YAML Configuration
The YAML configuration for the Knative Broker is detailed and includes helpful inline notes that explain the backoff and retry settings. This aids readers in understanding operational parameters.
404-407: IMPORTANT Block on Broker Behavior
The IMPORTANT block clarifies the operational impact of the retry mechanism (e.g., potential event drop after ~6 min 50 sec). This warning is valuable for users configuring their brokers.
409-413: NOTE on Dead Letter Sink Configuration
This section describes how to configure a dead letter sink for handling unrecoverable events. The guidance is concise and useful.
415-437: Legacy Application Changes – Refactored Java Code
The subsequent legacy application code snippet reinforces the shift from internal logic to event-driven processing. The code is consistent with the earlier legacy snippet and effectively demonstrates the asynchronous invocation and event handling.
439-446: NOTE on Legacy Changes Explanation
The NOTE here reinforces how the asynchronous fee calculation and event listening work, ensuring clarity for the reader.
448-451: Transition to Cloud Event Sender & Listener for Legacy Integration
This brief passage effectively introduces the next code section. It acts as a smooth transition and is well placed.
452-518: Duplicate CloudEventSender Implementation
This Java snippet appears to be a repetition of the CloudEventSender implementation seen earlier (lines 265-332). If intentional for reinforcement purposes, consider referencing the earlier snippet to avoid redundancy.
520-521: Reiteration of HTTP Client Simplicity
The reminder further clarifies that the implementation is basic. Repetition here is acceptable for emphasis, though ensure consistency with earlier references.
522-554: Duplicate CloudEventReceiver Implementation
This snippet is almost identical to the previous CloudEventReceiver block (lines 338-368).
If the duplication is intentional for illustrative purposes (e.g., to show integration in a different context), consider referencing the earlier instance.documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/02-architecture.adoc (17)
1-5: Document Title & Header Configuration
The title “Building Apps around the Event Mesh” and the header attributes set a consistent and informative context for the architecture document.
6-12: Introduction & Overview of Architecture
The opening lines introduce the paradigm shift towards eventual consistency with an Event Mesh architecture. The explanation is clear and paves the way for later details.
13-32: Technology Stack Section
The Technology Stack is detailed well with links to major products and open source projects. The inline references (e.g., to Kubernetes, Knative, Streams for Apache Kafka) provide useful context.
33-42: CNCF Projects Mention & In-depth Overview
Line 33 appropriately lists CNCF projects, and the “An in-depth look at the solution’s architecture” section (lines 35-42) provides a clear narrative on applying the Event Mesh model to both new and legacy systems.
43-51: Problem Analysis Section
The “Problem Analysis” section clearly explains the pitfalls of strict transactional consistency in real-world scenarios. The explanation is thorough and sets the stage for the solution discussion.
52-57: Solution Breakdown Section
The section introduces how the Event Mesh serves as a central hub for dispatching commands. The link to CQRS is well-established, and the differentiation between asynchronous commands and synchronous queries is clear.
59-65: Responsibilities of the Event Mesh
The explanation of the dual roles—persisting events and routing them to appropriate endpoints—is concise and informative.
66-76: Architectural Benefits of Integrating Event Mesh
The list of benefits (decomposition, alignment to business processes, resilience, performance) is comprehensive. Each bullet point adds valuable insight into the advantages of adopting an Event Mesh design.
103-107: PlantUML Diagram Introduction
The short introduction and the following PlantUML diagram provide a visual summary of the event flow. The diagram is referenced by an online editor link, which is helpful for readers who wish to experiment with it.
108-140: PlantUML Diagram Code Block
The UML diagram code is detailed and visually organizes the roles (Broker, Kafka, microservices, legacy system). The use of cloud, folder, and component elements is clear and aids in understanding the overall system flow.
142-152: Diagram Caption & TIP/NOTE Blocks
The caption and subsequent TIP and NOTE blocks effectively emphasize key details—such as the fact that applications are not pulling events from the queue and the Event Mesh handles retries internally.
153-159: Exponential Backoff Explanation
The note on the exponential backoff algorithm is clear. The formula notation is useful; just verify that the formatting translates well in the rendered output.
161-167: Work Ledger Analogy
The analogy comparing the Event Mesh to an old-fashioned work ledger is engaging and helps demystify the concept.
171-180: Differences from Event Sourcing
The section effectively distinguishes the Event Mesh from Event Sourcing, emphasizing the temporary nature of event storage. The explanation is comprehensive and clear.
218-229: Supporting Legacy Systems Section
The section on integrating legacy systems is concise and offers practical examples. It clearly outlines benefits such as gradual modernization without disrupting core logic.
230-237: Improving Resilience in Applications
The discussion on replacing synchronous calls with asynchronous event-driven communication is well articulated. The reference to eventual consistency is informative and further emphasizes the benefits of an Event Mesh.
238-252: More about the Technology Stack
The final section explains the transparency of Knative’s Event Mesh, the role of the CloudEvents format, and the minimal requirements for integration. This makes the technical investment appear low-risk and accessible.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (4)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/03-demo.adoc (4)
54-60: Caution Note on Method Issues
The CAUTION block clearly identifies two issues; however, there are minor typos. For example, change “+@Transational+” to “+@Transactional+” and rephrase “modify number of unrelated data stores” to “modifies multiple unrelated data stores” for better clarity.
66-74: Overuse of Transactional Processing
This section effectively explains why an all‐in–one transactional approach can be counterproductive by tying unrelated operations together.
Minor Note: Consider a quick review for consistency (e.g. “dependent” rather than “dependant”).
82-90: Bundling of Logical Domains
The explanation about the bundling of different business domains is well articulated. Correct the typo “withing” to “within” to improve readability.
115-137: UML Diagram for Event Flow
Embedding the PlantUML diagram is a strong addition—it visually communicates the event flow between components.
Suggestion: Ensure the external URL remains valid over time; consider adding a note or fallback in case the service becomes unavailable.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
documentation/modules/ROOT/nav.adoc(2 hunks)documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/01-pattern.adoc(1 hunks)documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/03-demo.adoc(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (16)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/03-demo.adoc (13)
1-10: Title and Introduction
The new title “Building Apps around the Event Mesh” along with the introductory lines (8–10) clearly set the context for the demo. This immediately signals the change in focus towards an event mesh–driven solution.
Suggestion: If you have the specific Java framework in mind, consider naming it for extra clarity.
12-18: Initial Application Section
The “Initial application” heading and the associated [IMPORTANT] callout correctly alert the reader that the following example is a counterexample. This setup prepares readers to scrutinize the problematic design shown in the upcoming code.
22-51: Java Code Example – completeTransit Method
The code block demonstrates the use of the@Transactionalannotation together with the merging of business domains. The inline markers such as<1>and<2>are helpful for cross–referencing later discussion.
Suggestion: Verify that formatting (indentation and spacing) meets the project’s coding style and that all marker references are accurate.
91-107: Refactoring Plan Overview
This section outlines the plan to extract the drivers module and shift fee calculation to an asynchronous process via the event mesh pattern. The detailed description aligns well with the overall documentation goals.
142-146: Run this Demonstration Callout
The “Run this demonstration” section clearly directs users to the next steps.
Suggestion: A brief troubleshooting tip for first–time users could further improve this section.
149-152: Demo Environment Prerequisites
The instructions regarding the OpenShift Container Platform, Red Hat Developer Sandbox, and OpenShift Local are clearly stated.
Suggestion: Double–check all included URLs and resource recommendations to ensure they remain current.
164-189: Serverless Operator Installation Manifest
The YAML manifest provided for installing the Serverless Operator is detailed and clear.
Suggestion: Confirm that the specified version (v1.35.0) is still current, and ensure that the note about replacing the version is easy to locate.
190-199: Command–Line Instructions for Deployment
The shell commands for deploying the manifests (including theoc waitcommands) are precise and sequentially correct.
Suggestion: Make sure that descriptive error messages clearly inform users if a deployment step fails.
216-357: Installation and Configuration Sections
The subsequent sections covering the installation of the Serving and Eventing components, demo applications, and Event Mesh configuration are comprehensive. The step–by–step instructions (including YAML and shell command blocks) ensure that users are well–guided.
Suggestion: Verify that all external links and manifest version references are in line with the latest documentation standards.
383-444: Walkthrough Guide and Testing Instructions
The walkthrough guide is extensive and includes the use of tools like thesterncommand,oc logs, and example curl requests. This thorough approach will help users test the setup effectively.
Suggestion: A final verification of command outputs is recommended to ensure that any changes in tooling or API responses are captured.
500-551: In–Depth Refactoring & Drivers Module (Rust)
The in–depth section on refactoring—with the accompanying Rust code for fee calculation—is clear and informative. Inline annotations such as<1>and<2>effectively explain the process.
Suggestion: Confirm that the Rust code adheres to your project’s formatting guidelines and that log messages meet organizational standards.
562-621: Cloud Events Integration in Rust and Java
The segments detailing the HTTP listener routes, Cloud Event sender logic, and the event conversion in the legacy Java application provide a solid example of integrating Cloud Events into the overall architecture. The distinction between external Cloud Events and internal domain events is maintained clearly.
Suggestion: Double–check that all example code complies with our coding style guidelines and that all inline comments accurately explain the corresponding code.Also applies to: 672-804
825-903: Event Mesh Configuration and Conclusion
The YAML configurations for SinkBinding and Trigger—as well as the concluding remarks—concisely summarize the refactored solution.
Suggestion: Minor improvements could include a final pass for YAML formatting consistency and ensuring that event filter types match across the documentation.documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/01-pattern.adoc (2)
1-14: The Story Behind This Solution Pattern
This section effectively sets the stage by presenting the fictional Cabs scenario and describing the legacy challenges. The inclusion of external links (e.g. YouTube talk and CQRS definition) enriches the content.
Suggestion: Ensure that link formatting and presentation are consistent throughout the document.
15-31: The Solution Section
This part clearly explains how an event mesh serves as a dynamic, reliable, and decoupled infrastructure layer. The bullet–point format neatly conveys the key benefits.documentation/modules/ROOT/nav.adoc (1)
3-3: Navigation Structure Update
The updated navigation entries now reflect the new content structure. For example, the demo section now includes entries for “Initial application,” “Refactoring plan,” “Run this demonstration,” “In–depth look at the refactoring,” and “Conclusion.”
Suggestion: Double–check that all anchor links (e.g._the_storyand those under the demo section) exactly match the corresponding section IDs in their respective files to ensure seamless navigation.Also applies to: 11-15
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (12)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/03-demo.adoc (7)
1-10: Introduction and Title Update
The new title “Building Apps around the Event Mesh” effectively sets the theme for the document, and the introduction smoothly leads into the Cabs ride-sharing example. Consider adding a brief note identifying the Java framework (e.g., Spring Boot) if that detail would provide helpful context for readers.
24-51: Java Code Example – completeTransit Method
The completeTransit code snippet clearly demonstrates common pitfalls when merging multiple responsibilities (such as saving data, business validations, and domain logic) in one method. The inline markers (<1>, <2>) help direct attention to the identified issues. There is a minor typo in the annotation: “+@Transational+” should be “+@transactional+”. Consider also polishing the error messages for consistency.
54-60: Caution Block on Design Pitfalls
The caution notes effectively call out issues such as overuse of transactional annotations and merging distinct business domains. To further aid readability, consider rephrasing phrases like “operate on number of unrelated data” to “operates on multiple unrelated data stores” or “unrelated business domains.”
66-75: Discussion on Overuse of Transactional Processing
This section provides a clear explanation of why a highly transactional approach may be detrimental—in particular, it explains how a failure in one operation can roll back the entire chain and negatively impact the user experience. Again, note the typo “+@Transational+” should be corrected. A slight rewording for precision in “operate on number of unrelated data” is recommended.
82-90: Bundling Multiple Logical Domains
The description accurately highlights the risks of combining different business domains in one method. To enhance clarity, consider rephrasing parts such as “developers cramp new instructions” to “developers continue to append additional logic,” which might read more smoothly.
91-101: Refactoring Plan Overview
The refactoring plan is well articulated, outlining the intention to extract the drivers module to handle fee calculations asynchronously via the Event Mesh. This helps set clear expectations for future improvements. You might additionally note an overview of error-handling strategies for the asynchronous process.
109-111: Diagram Placeholder for Event Flow
The embedded PlantUML image provides a useful visualization of the refactored event flow. Please remember to replace the “TODO” placeholder with a final custom graphic before merging to avoid leaving unfinished elements in the documentation.documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/02-architecture.adoc (5)
8-11: Introduction Clarity
The introduction succinctly explains the paradigm shift from traditional transactional designs to an eventually consistent model—this sets a solid foundation for the rest of the document. A brief example or a practical insight here might further emphasize its real‐world applicability.
66-76: Architectural Benefits
The bullet‐point list of benefits—such as independent service decomposition, improved business alignment, increased resilience, and better performance—is comprehensive and clear. Consider verifying that the external link for Domain‑driven design aligns with your documentation guidelines.
103-105: Diagram Placeholder
Similar to the demo page, this placeholder for custom graphics now includes a PlantUML image URL. Ensure that, before final deployment, the “TODO” note is addressed by replacing it with finalized imagery.
106-107: Editor Link for Diagram
Including a direct editor link is useful for future diagram modifications. If possible, consider relocating this to an appendix or a comment section to keep the main document focused.
190-216: Comparison Table: Service Mesh vs. Event Mesh
The table concisely captures the key similarities and differences between the two paradigms in a reader-friendly format. Ensure that the table’s visual formatting meets the intended style for clarity.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/02-architecture.adoc(1 hunks)documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/03-demo.adoc(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (21)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/03-demo.adoc (2)
102-105: Definition of Event Types
The section clearly defines the two event types—“+CalculateFee+” as a command event and “+DriverFeeCalculated+” as an informational event. This clearly supports the later explanation of the asynchronous workflow.
117-141: PlantUML Diagram for Event Flow
The detailed PlantUML diagram effectively illustrates the interactions among the legacy application, the Knative Event Mesh, and the fee calculation service. The chosen theme (“materia-outline”) makes for a clear visual presentation. Ensure that any naming conventions used in the diagram are consistent with the narrative in the rest of the document.documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/02-architecture.adoc (19)
1-5: Document Title and Metadata
The title “Building Apps around the Event Mesh” is clearly presented, and the document’s metadata (sectnums, sectlinks, doctype) is appropriately configured for a book-style format.
16-17: Technology Stack Introduction
The introductory statement for the technology stack is clear and effectively sets up the following detailed list of technologies.
20-28: Detailed Listing of Red Hat Products
This segment details the Red Hat supported products along with their roles—such as orchestrating containerized applications and providing Event Mesh capabilities. The contextual “Based on…” lines are helpful for readers to understand the foundation.
29-34: Additional Open Source Technologies and CNCF Projects
The additional list includes CloudEvents, OpenTelemetry, and language examples (Rust and Java), which is useful. The reference to CNCF projects via the landscape link further strengthens the context.
38-42: In-depth Architectural Overview
This section offers a concise yet insightful view of how an Event Mesh can be applied to both new and legacy systems. The discussion of domain boundaries and modularization is well-presented.
43-51: Problem Analysis Section
The “Problem Analysis” section clearly outlines the limitations of strict transactional consistency in real-world applications. The examples provided help underscore why a shift to an eventual consistency model might be necessary.
52-57: Solution Breakdown
Detailing the role of the Event Mesh as a central hub under the CQRS paradigm is very effective here. This clear separation between asynchronous commands and synchronous queries improves the reader’s understanding of the solution’s design.
59-65: Event Mesh Responsibilities and Resilience
This part emphasizes the dual roles of persisting events and routing them correctly while mentioning built-in retry strategies. It reinforces the reliability of the Event Mesh concept.
85-101: Event Mesh Flow Explanation
The step-by-step breakdown of a typical event flow is well-structured. It clearly explains how an HTTP request is transformed into a command event, persisted, routed, and processed. The mention of the “202 Accepted” response reinforces practical behavior.
109-141: Architecture Diagram
The extended PlantUML diagram clearly visualizes the interaction between the Event Mesh, microservices, and legacy systems. The chosen “cerulean-outline” theme and layout (with clouds, folders, and components) are clear. Confirm that the naming and directional arrows accurately reflect the intended data flow.
142-150: Diagram Explanation and TIP
The explanation immediately following the diagram reinforces its meaning, emphasizing that applications do not pull events from the queue but receive them as pushed REST messages. This clarification is helpful.
151-157: Exponential Backoff and Dead Letter Sink
The note on the retry mechanism—including the exponential backoff formula and the option for a dead letter sink—is detailed and informative. This technical insight should be valuable for advanced configuration scenarios.
159-168: Work Ledger Analogy
The analogy comparing the Event Mesh to a traditional work ledger is quite effective in conveying the concept of temporary persistence until successful processing. It makes the abstract idea more tangible without oversimplifying.
169-179: Differences from Event Sourcing
The clarification of how Event Mesh differs from Event Sourcing—especially regarding transient data retention and ease of schema evolution—is clear and well-argued.
180-182: Backward Compatibility Considerations
The discussion on how regular datastores retain the source of truth and manage backward compatibility is informative and reinforces established maintenance practices.
183-189: Differences from Service Mesh
This segment succinctly contrasts the synchronous service mesh with the asynchronous event mesh, highlighting that the latter is better suited for command processing. The explanation is clear; just verify that the table and text formatting work as expected in the final output.
218-229: Supporting Legacy Systems
This section effectively outlines strategies for integrating legacy applications with the Event Mesh using lightweight adapters, which can mitigate the impact of modernization efforts.
230-238: Improving Resilience in Applications
The description of how asynchronous event-driven communications can prevent cascading failures (for example, in invoicing or notification services) is compelling and well-supported by examples.
239-252: More about the Technology Stack
The final section reassures readers that Knative’s Event Mesh operates transparently via the CloudEvents standard, reducing concerns about vendor lock-in and easing the testing process. This reinforces confidence in the proposed architecture and is clearly communicated.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (7)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/03-demo.adoc (7)
1-10: Title & Introduction Clarity
The new title “Building Apps around the Event Mesh” clearly sets the focus. In the introduction (lines 8–10), consider rephrasing “that resembles real-world solutions of similar kind” to something like “that mirrors a real-world ride‑sharing service” for better clarity and grammatical precision.
12-19: Initial Application Section Presentation
The “Initial application” section is well demarcated and the warning block (lines 15–18) clearly indicates that the subsequent example is an anti‐pattern. For improved tone, you might rephrase “most likely a counterexample!” to “an illustrative counterexample.”
24-51: Java Code Snippet – completeTransit Method
This code snippet effectively demonstrates a “suboptimal” approach for educational purposes. A couple of suggestions:
• The inline markers (e.g.,<2>) are repeated across several lines; if they refer to distinct issues, using unique identifiers could improve readability.
• Although the use of@Transactionalis intentional here, please ensure consistency since later narrative references show a typo (+@Transational+).
66-91: Discussion on Transactional Overuse & Domain Bundling
The narrative detailing “Overuse of transactional processing” and “Bundling of different logical domains” is comprehensive. Please correct the typo in line 72 (“+@Transational+” should be “+@transactional+”) and consider minor rewording for smoother flow where appropriate.
110-139: Refactoring Plan & PlantUML Diagram
The detailed refactoring plan and accompanying PlantUML diagram provide excellent context for the architectural changes. Note the “TODO: Replace with custom graphics” comment (line 111); ensure that a finalized graphic is supplied before release.
563-584: Rust HTTP Listener – Event Routing
The HTTP service route implementation using a match once.ty()is straightforward and effective for the current scope. For future scalability, consider refactoring to a more dynamic routing mechanism if additional event types are anticipated.
703-769: Java CloudEventSender Implementation
The CloudEventSender class neatly illustrates the sending of JSON‑formatted CloudEvents via a HTTP POST request. Note: In line 727, the logger is instantiated withLoggerFactory.getLogger(EventSender.class)but since this is the implementation of CloudEventSender, it would be clearer to use
CloudEventSender.classinstead.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
dev-site.yml(1 hunks)documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/03-demo.adoc(1 hunks)site.yml(2 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- site.yml
- dev-site.yml
🔇 Additional comments (17)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/03-demo.adoc (17)
54-60: Caution Block on Method Issues
The caution block clearly outlines the pitfalls—such as overusing transactional processing and mixing business domains. The use of annotated markers (<1> and <2>) aids comprehension.
141-156: “Run this Demonstration” Section
The instructions for running the demonstration and the prerequisite details are clear and actionable. It would be beneficial to periodically verify that all links and version details remain current.
165-201: Installing the Serverless Operator
The step‑by‑step instructions for installing the Serverless Operator are thorough. Please double‑check that the referenced version (v1.35.0) is the current stable release and that the URLs remain accessible.
217-253: Installing Serving and Eventing Components
The YAML manifests and instructions provided for installing the Serving and Eventing components are detailed and correctly formatted.
285-303: Installing the Demo Applications
The commands and GitHub URL references for installing the demo applications are straightforward. Ensure that the external links continue to be maintained for accessibility.
325-358: Event Mesh Configuration Instructions
The YAML configuration for the Broker along with the waiting commands is comprehensive. Verify that the retry counts, backoff policies, and timing meet operational needs in your environment.
384-404: Walkthrough Guide for Log Monitoring
The guide effectively recommends using tools such assternand provides alternativeoccommands for log retrieval. This practical advice should assist users in troubleshooting scale‑to‑zero scenarios.
429-441: cURL Command for Triggering the Legacy Endpoint
The provided cURL command is clear and includes a well‑formatted JSON payload. It’s a good practical example; just ensure that the endpoint (retrieved via oc) is valid during testing.
501-520: Introduction to the In‑Depth Refactoring Section
The introductory narrative for the refactoring plan, including the extraction of the drivers module, sets the stage well for the subsequent code examples.
521-552: Rust Code – calculate_fee Method
The Rust implementation for fee calculation is well‑structured, with clear inline comments explaining each operation. This asynchronous method is easy to follow and demonstrates good Rust idioms.
597-621: Rust Cloud Event Sender Implementation
This snippet is concise and properly handles error propagation. It cleanly demonstrates sending an event via HTTP POST.
672-679: Legacy Application – completeTransit Refactoring
The refactored legacy method clearly shows the transition toward asynchronous processing for fee calculation. The changes are straightforward and well explained.
681-687: Java Event Listener – driverFeeCalculated
The event listener for processing the fee calculation events is simple and effective. The use ofObjects.requireNonNullhelps ensure valid input.
776-806: Java CloudEventReceiver – HTTP Listener
The CloudEventReceiver is implemented effectively. Iterating through converters to match and unwrap the event is clear and the error handling is appropriate.
824-861: YAML Configuration – SinkBinding Resources
The SinkBinding YAML configuration is clear and properly binds the event source to the Broker. No changes needed here.
869-904: YAML Configuration – Trigger Resources
The Trigger resources are well‑defined for filtering and routing events based on their type. This configuration is easy to follow and implement.
909-919: Conclusion Section
The conclusion effectively summarizes the system improvements and the benefits of refactoring towards an event‑driven architecture. It wraps up the document nicely.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 3
🧹 Nitpick comments (56)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/03-demo.adoc (56)
1-10: Title and Introduction Consistency:
The updated title “Building Apps around the Event Mesh” immediately sets the theme, and the introductory lines (including lines 8–10) clearly introduce a Cabs ride-sharing example. Consider adding one or two brief sentences to explain what an “Event Mesh” is for readers who might be new to the concept.
12-13: Anchor and Section Header:
The anchor[#_initial_application]and the section heading “== Initial application” form a clear reference point. Verify that any internal links elsewhere in the documentation correctly point to this anchor.
15-18: Admonition on Example Quality:
The [IMPORTANT] block clearly signals that the following example is suboptimal—a counterexample. To further aid the reader, consider briefly summarizing why this example is problematic (e.g. mixing domains, overusing transactions) right here.
20-20: Introduction to Code Example:
The sentence “Here's a method from the Cabs application that handles the completion of a ride” (line 20) sets up the reader for the upcoming code snippet. For additional clarity, you might mention that the method will later be critiqued for its design choices.
22-52: Java Code Example Review:
The code snippet illustrating thecompleteTransitmethod (lines 22–52) is detailed and uses inline markers (e.g.<1>,<2>). This effectively highlights the areas of concern. Please ensure that these marker numbers match up in the subsequent explanation and that the formatting (indentation, use of comments) remains consistent with your overall documentation style.
54-60: Admonition Clarity for Code Issues:
The [CAUTION] block (lines 54–60) outlines two key issues: the overuse of the@Transactionalannotation and the merging of different business domains. It might be helpful to elaborate just a little on the potential consequences of each issue for less experienced readers.
62-64: Contextualizing Common Patterns:
The brief discussion (lines 62–64) that “Similar methods are, unfortunately, quite common...” successfully sets up the rationale for the detailed problem breakdown that follows. A bullet‐list or a short summary of the main pitfalls could further reinforce the key points.
76-80: Note on Independent Operations:
The [NOTE] block (lines 76–80) advises that operations should ideally be independent. A slight rephrasing (for instance, “all operations could ideally occur asynchronously and independently”) might increase clarity.
82-90: Separation of Logical Domains:
The “=== Bundling of different logical domains” section (lines 82–90) clearly identifies issues with coupling various business concerns. To further assist the reader, you may consider providing a very brief suggestion on how to separate these concerns (e.g. “consider extracting the fee calculation logic into a dedicated service…”).
92-101: Overview of Refactoring Plan:
The “== Refactoring plan” section (lines 92–101) outlines the intended improvements. It might be helpful to add a sentence explaining why asynchronous fee calculation (and thus the event mesh pattern) is a better approach compared to the current design.
103-107: Clarification on Event Types:
The description of the two event types (+CalculateFee+and+DriverFeeCalculated+) (lines 103–107) is concise and clear. Adding a very brief note on the expected payloads or message flow could further bolster the reader’s understanding.
108-112: Diagram and Placeholder Graphics:
The section introducing the diagram (lines 108–112) is strong; however, note the “// TODO: Replace with custom graphics” reminder. Replacing this placeholder with a finalized version (or at least a clear note that it’s temporary) will avoid potential confusion.
113-116: Online PlantUML Editor Link:
The online editor link provided (lines 113–116) is a practical addition. Consider ensuring that if the link becomes unavailable, a static image fallback is in place for continuous clarity.
139-141: Diagram Explanation Post-Rendering:
The brief follow-up explanation (lines 139–141) correctly reiterates the purpose of the diagram. You might consider cross-referencing the diagram section later in the document if readers need reminders about its significance.
143-146: Run Demonstration Section Introduction:
The heading “== Run this demonstration” (lines 143–146) is clear. Verify that later sections comprehensively detail prerequisites and expected outcomes for users at different expertise levels.
150-150: Prerequisite Details for Cluster Setup:
In the “Before getting started” section (lines 150, 152, 154), the instructions for using an OpenShift instance are clear and include useful links. Ensure that the URLs are current and consider indicating if they open in a new tab for better user experience.Also applies to: 152-152, 154-154
159-205: Installing the Serverless Operator:
The instructions and YAML manifests (lines 159–205) are well laid out. In particular, the placeholder version string (+v1.35.0+) should be clearly marked for replacement. Additionally, re-check that all API versions and URLs reflect the latest documentation.
207-215: Expected Output for Operator Installation:
The expected output section (lines 207–215) illustrates successful creation of resources. A brief remark to help users troubleshoot if the output is different might be beneficial.
217-269: Installing Serving and Eventing Components:
This section (lines 217–269) provides detailed YAML manifests and shell commands. Ensure that the instructions work across common shell environments and that the command syntax (especially with wait conditions) is robust.
271-283: Expected Output for Serving/Eventing Components:
The output block (lines 271–283) is clear. Consider including a small tip on how to confirm that the “Ready” condition truly indicates successful deployment.
285-309: Demo Applications Deployment:
The section “==== Installing the demo applications” (lines 285–309) provides step-by-step instructions. Verify that resource names and file paths (like paths in the GitHub links) are accurate and that the steps are in the logically correct order.
311-323: Expected Output for Demo Applications:
The expected output (lines 311–323) is well formatted. Consider adding a short explanation of each key resource created to help less experienced users interpret the output.
324-359: Configuring the Event Mesh:
The instructions for configuring the Event Mesh (lines 324–359) using SinkBinding and Trigger resources are detailed. Please verify that the YAML syntax is valid and that the wait commands for resource readiness function as expected across environments.
361-374: Expected Output for Event Mesh Configuration:
The expected output (lines 361–374) is self-explanatory. A note on potential discrepancies and troubleshooting (e.g. “if you see warnings about annotations, these will be patched automatically”) could further assist readers.
376-382: Visualization of Deployed Solution:
The explanation accompanying the image (lines 376–382) is clear. For accessibility, consider adding descriptive alt text for the image, and verify the image path or URL remains valid as the documentation evolves.
386-392: Walkthrough Guide Introduction:
The introductory part of the “Walkthrough guide” (lines 386–392) sets expectations well. If possible, include a short troubleshooting section for common issues (e.g. connection timeouts or scaling delays) in later revisions.
394-423: Capturing and Tailoring Application Logs:
The shell command examples (lines 394–423) for using tools like stern and oc logs are clear. It might help to briefly describe prerequisites (e.g., tool installation, access rights) to avoid confusion for new users.
425-441: Invoking the Legacy Endpoint with cURL:
The detailed cURL command (lines 425–441) uses a heredoc to define the JSON payload, which is neatly formatted. Ensure that the payload structure is validated and that readers are aware of any prerequisites (e.g. cURL version) required for this syntax.
443-447: Post-Invocation Expectations:
The explanation following the cURL invocation (lines 443–447) clearly communicates what users should expect. A note on how to verify that the logs have updated (e.g. specific log line examples) could further enhance clarity.
448-491: Analysis of Log Excerpts:
The log excerpts (lines 448–491) effectively capture the event flow from publication to routing. Please double-check for any potentially sensitive information before publication and consider summarizing the most important log messages for reader clarity.
492-497: Transition to In-depth Refactoring:
The short transition (lines 492–497) to the “In-depth look at the refactoring” section is smooth. A brief introductory sentence summarizing key takeaways from the demonstration could provide a better narrative bridge.
498-507: In-depth Refactoring Overview:
The introduction for the in-depth refactoring (lines 498–507) clearly reiterates the scope and purpose. Ensure that the delineation between the initial demo and the deep dive is unmistakable for the reader.
510-518: Drivers Module Overview:
The “=== Drivers module” section (lines 510–518) introduces the planned extraction of driver-related functionality into a standalone service using Rust. There is a minor typographical error (“staring point” should read “starting point”) that should be corrected.
521-552: Rust Code for Fee Calculation:
The Rust code (lines 521–552) detailing the asynchronous fee calculation is clear and well annotated with inline markers. Please verify that the code compiles as written and that the markers align with the subsequent explanation.
554-558: Explanation of Rust Code Steps:
The bullet points (lines 554–558) explaining the Rust snippet map the logic nicely. Formatting these points as an explicit list (if supported by your renderer) might improve readability.
561-584: Rust HTTP Listener Implementation:
The example of therecvfunction (lines 561–584) that routes events based on type is straightforward. Consider enhancing error logging for unsupported event types to aid in debugging during production.
587-591: Note on Simple Event Routing:
The [NOTE] block (lines 587–591) correctly points out that a simple switch statement is used solely for demonstration. A short suggestion to explore more robust routing strategies for production may be useful.
593-623: Rust CloudEvent Sender Review:
The CloudEvent sender implementation (lines 593–623) is well structured. It might be advantageous to consider leveraging well-known HTTP client libraries (e.g. reqwest) for improved error handling and maintainability.
624-627: Clarification on HTTP POST Behavior:
The explanation (lines 624–627) about the use of the POST method to send JSON representations of events is concise. Ensure that consistency is maintained in the description of the CloudEvent structure across the document.
627-632: Transition to Event Mesh Configuration:
The brief transition into the “=== Event Mesh” section (lines 627–632) smoothly connects the prior code examples with upcoming configuration details. Double-check that terminology (e.g. “Event Mesh” vs. “Mesh”) is used consistently.
657-662: DeadLetterSink Note:
The [NOTE] block (lines 657–662) discussing thedeadLetterSinkoption adds valuable context for handling failed events. Consider linking to further documentation so readers can learn more about configuring this option.
663-667: Introducing Legacy Application Changes:
The “=== Legacy application changes” section (lines 663–667) appropriately signals the transition from legacy synchronous processing to an event-driven approach. Confirm that all references to service methods (e.g.calculateDriverFee) remain consistent throughout the documentation.
669-678: Refactored Legacy Java Code:
The Java snippet (lines 669–678) that shows the refactoredcompleteTransitmethod is concise. Ensure that the comment markers (e.g.<1>) are consistent with later notes and that the asynchronous invocation ofcalculateDriverFeeis clearly highlighted.
679-687: Java EventListener Example:
The event listener code (lines 679–687) is straightforward and demonstrates how domain events are consumed. It might help to mention what error handling (if any) occurs if the event processing fails.
689-696: Clarification Note on Legacy Code:
The [NOTE] block (lines 689–696) clearly describes thatcalculateDriverFeeis invoked asynchronously and that domain events propagate the calculated fee. Emphasizing the decoupling benefit here would further reinforce the design improvement.
698-700: Introducing Cloud Event Integration:
The brief introduction (lines 698–700) to adding a Cloud Event sender and listener is effective. You might consider pairing this with a diagram in a future revision to visually summarize the integration.
702-723: DriverFeeService Code Review:
The Java code forDriverFeeService(lines 702–723) is clear and adheres to typical Spring dependency injection patterns. Confirm that the event payload (e.g. values fromtransitPrice.toInt()) meets the requirements of downstream systems.
724-744: CloudEventSender Implementation:
The detailed implementation ofCloudEventSender(lines 724–744) is comprehensive. Consider externalizing repeated configuration values (such as the sink URL) into properties for easier maintenance. Also, ensure that any potential IO exceptions are meaningfully logged or bubbled-up.
771-772: Closing Remarks on CloudEventSender:
The brief explanation following the CloudEventSender (lines 771–772) wraps up the sender logic well. A reference to further reading on robust HTTP client usage in Java might enrich this section.
773-803: CloudEventReceiver Implementation:
The CloudEventReceiver code (lines 773–803) is well organized. The for-loop that selects the correct converter is a good design choice; just ensure that the exception thrown when no match is found provides sufficient detail to aid troubleshooting.
806-810: Explanation of Receiver Functionality:
The explanation under the CloudEventReceiver (lines 806–810) neatly outlines the conversion from CloudEvent to a domain event and subsequent publishing. Watch for minor typos (e.g. “withing” should be “within”) for clarity.
817-822: Event Mesh Wiring Overview:
The introductory lines (817–822) for “The wiring of our Event Mesh” clearly prepare the reader for YAML configuration details. A high-level diagram here might further elucidate how components interconnect.
823-861: SinkBinding YAML Configuration:
The YAML configuration for SinkBindings (lines 823–861) is clear and complete. Double-check indentations and API versions to ensure compatibility with current Knative releases.
868-904: Trigger YAML Configuration:
The YAML for Triggers (lines 868–904) is very detailed. Please verify that the filter criteria (i.e. the event type attributes) precisely match the events emitted by your services.
906-907: Event Type Filter Note:
The note (lines 906–907) reinforcing that the event type is used as a filter is clear.
908-916: Conclusion Section:
The “== Conclusion” section (lines 908–916) concisely summarizes the refactoring benefits. Consider adding links or references to additional resources or next steps in further modernizing the application for readers who want to dive deeper.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/03-demo.adoc(1 hunks)documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/developer-resources.adoc(1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/developer-resources.adoc
🔇 Additional comments (3)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/03-demo.adoc (3)
117-137: Sequence Diagram Definition:
The PlantUML code (lines 117–137) effectively outlines the event flow between components. Double-check that participant names and actions align with later narrative explanations. Overall, the diagram’s structure is solid.
812-816: Clarification on Publisher vs. Sender:
The [CAUTION] block (lines 812–816) effectively emphasizes the difference between the framework’s EventsPublisher and the Cloud Event sender/receiver. No further changes are needed here.
863-866: SinkBinding Explanation:
The short commentary (lines 863–866) explaining the role of the SinkBinding resources is succinct and helpful.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (8)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/03-demo.adoc (8)
1-10: Title and Introduction ClarityThe updated title “Building Apps around the Event Mesh” immediately conveys the topic. The introductory paragraphs (lines 8–10) are concise and engaging. For added clarity, consider specifying the actual Java framework (if applicable) rather than “a popular Java framework.”
20-52: Java Example:completeTransitMethodThe Java code snippet illustrating the
completeTransitmethod is comprehensive and well-annotated with inline markers (e.g.,<1>and<2>). This provides a clear mapping to the subsequent explanations. Verify that the inline markers are self-explanatory and will be maintained (or removed) in the final version if they serve only as teaching aids.
54-64: Caution Block on Method IssuesThe caution block succinctly highlights the dual issues:
- The use of the
+@Transactional+annotation across unrelated data operations.- The merging of different business domains within one method.
To improve clarity, consider rephrasing “merges different, business domains” to “merges business logic from multiple domains.”
66-74: Discussion on Transactional OveruseThis section gives a thorough explanation of the pitfalls in overusing transactional processing. A minor grammatical improvement would be to change “operate on number of unrelated data” (line 71) to “operates on several unrelated data sources” or “unrelated data stores.”
81-89: Bundling of Logical DomainsThe explanation on bundling different logical domains is informative. A small nitpick: in the phrase “extract instructions to a separate blocks,” consider revising it to “extract instructions into separate blocks” for better grammatical correctness.
110-116: PlantUML Diagram and Placeholder ReminderThe PlantUML diagram is detailed and offers a valuable visual representation of the event flow. Note the embedded TODO (“Replace with custom graphics”); please ensure that this placeholder is updated with finalized graphics before the document is published.
521-552: Rust Code Snippet for Fee CalculationThe Rust snippet for the asynchronous fee calculation is well presented and appropriately annotated. For enhanced clarity, consider adding a brief inline comment near the call to
Self::unwrap_calculatefee(ce)?(line 525) to explain its error-handling rationale.
777-806: Java CloudEventReceiver ImplementationThe CloudEventReceiver code efficiently demonstrates the process of unwrapping a CloudEvent into an internal domain event. It might be beneficial to document (perhaps in a short inline comment) the behavior when no matching converter is found, ensuring readers understand the error-handling strategy adopted here.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/03-demo.adoc(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (4)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/03-demo.adoc (4)
12-18: Identifying the Initial ApplicationThe “Initial application” section is clearly marked with the referenced anchor and heading. The [IMPORTANT] block emphasizing that the following example is a counterexample effectively sets the reader’s expectations.
93-102: Refactoring Plan OverviewThe “Refactoring plan” section clearly outlines the steps toward decoupling the drivers module and leveraging asynchronous Cloud Events. The plan aligns well with the overall PR objectives and provides a good high-level roadmap for the refactoring.
384-424: Walkthrough Guide DetailingThe walkthrough guide section provides clear, step-by-step instructions—including the suggestion to use the
sterntool for log monitoring in scale-to-zero scenarios. This level of detail is excellent for users setting up and testing the demo application.
909-919: Conclusion SummarizationThe conclusion effectively summarizes the improvements brought by the refactoring, emphasizing resiliency, eventual consistency, and distributed design. It provides a strong wrap-up that reinforces the benefits of the solution pattern.
cardil
force-pushed
the
feature/initial-contents
branch
from
ab16a5f to
f1240b1
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (15)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/03-demo.adoc (15)
1-10: Title and Introduction Update:
The new title, "Building Apps around the Event Mesh", along with the introductory lines (lines 8–10), clearly sets the stage for the documentation. To further enhance clarity, consider specifying which Java framework is used in the application example, as the phrase “popular Java framework” is a bit generic.
12-18: Initial Application Section & Counterexample Notice:
The header and the [IMPORTANT] block (lines 12–18) effectively signal that the subsequent example is suboptimal (i.e. a counterexample). Before final publication, verify that any placeholder language is updated to maintain a consistent, professional tone.
24-51: Anti-Pattern in the Java Code Example:
The completeTransit method (lines 24–51) serves as an effective anti-example by highlighting issues such as the overuse of the@Transactionalannotation and the conflation of different business domains (as noted by<1>and<2>). To further support readers, consider adding inline commentary that explains how each identified issue impacts maintainability and error handling.
54-60: Caution Block & Annotation Clarification:
The [CAUTION] block (lines 54–60) clearly summarizes the issues in the example. However, the phrasing in line 71—“operate on number of unrelated data”—could be refined (e.g., “operates on multiple unrelated data sources”).
66-74: Overuse of Transactional Processing Explanation:
The section (lines 66–74) effectively critiques the blanket use of the@Transactionalannotation. A minor improvement would be to adjust the grammar in line 71.
81-88: Bundling of Logical Domains Discussion:
The discussion (lines 81–88) about bundling different business domains in a single method is comprehensive. For enhanced readability, consider rephrasing line 85 to emphasize that the code, while simple initially, becomes convoluted as more features are added.
90-100: Refactoring Plan Overview:
The refactoring plan (lines 90–100) is clearly laid out, detailing the shift to an asynchronous fee calculation using an Event Mesh. A brief bullet‐point summary of the benefits (e.g., improved resilience, decoupling of services) might help reinforce the rationale behind this approach.
102-103: Placeholder for Custom Graphics:
The TODO note (lines 102–103) is a helpful reminder to replace the placeholder graphic. Ensure this is updated with final artwork or an appropriately hosted image before the documentation is finalized.
117-139: UML Diagram Visualization:
The PlantUML diagram block (lines 117–139) provides a clear visualization of the event flow between the Legacy App, Knative Event Mesh (Broker), Drivers Module (FeeService), and Database. Consider verifying that the external PlantUML URL remains accessible or think about hosting the image locally to avoid potential external dependency issues.
144-147: Run This Demonstration Section:
The section header (line 144) and the following brief introduction (line 146) effectively transition the reader to the demo instructions. It might be useful to mention any prerequisites (such as specific cluster access or environment variables) needed to run the demonstration.
501-516: In-depth Refactoring Overview:
The “In-depth look at the refactoring” section (lines 501–516) clearly outlines the plan to extract the drivers module and the benefits of asynchronous processing. A brief explanation of why Rust was chosen for the standalone service may add valuable context for readers.
521-551: Rust Code for Driver Fee Calculation:
The Rust code snippet (lines 521–551) demonstrates asynchronous fee calculation and CloudEvent handling succinctly. It would be helpful to include a note about the required dependencies (such as the async runtime or specific crates) or a reference to a setup guide for the Rust environment.
564-584: HTTP Route Configuration in Rust:
The code block (lines 564–584) that sets up the HTTP route and handles the event routing via a simple switch statement is clear and easy to follow. For production use, you might consider a more scalable routing strategy if the number of event types grows.
597-621: CloudEventSender Java Implementation:
The CloudEventSender class (lines 597–621) implements the HTTP POST request to send CloudEvents effectively. One minor suggestion is to verify that the logger (instantiated for EventSender) is correctly named to reflect the class (CloudEventSender) for better log categorization.
777-805: CloudEventReceiver Functionality:
The CloudEventReceiver (lines 777–805) appropriately unpacks CloudEvents and delegates them to the internal EventsPublisher. Considering robustness, you might add error handling in cases where none of the converters match the incoming event.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/03-demo.adoc(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (12)
documentation/modules/ROOT/pages/03-demo.adoc (12)
20-23: Introduction to the Code Example:
The one-line introduction (line 20) to the completeTransit method is concise and directs the reader’s attention to the following example.
141-142: Diagram Explanation:
The brief explanatory text (lines 141–142) following the diagram succinctly reinforces the depicted flow.
165-190: Installation of the Serverless Operator:
The YAML manifests (lines 165–190) for installing the Serverless Operator are clearly presented. The instructions to replace the version (as hinted in subsequent notes) are notably helpful. Please verify that the specified version (e.g. "v1.35.0") is still current, or consider parameterizing the version information for easier future updates.
219-222: Installing Serving and Eventing Components:
The deployment instructions along with YAML snippets (lines 219–222) are well structured and include helpful links to the official documentation. Ensure that the version numbers and links remain consistent with the current releases of the OpenShift Serverless documentation.
225-253: Manifest and Expected Output for Serverless Components:
The declarative manifests (lines 225–253) and their corresponding expected output are detailed and serve as a robust guide. It would be beneficial to periodically review these instructions for consistency with updates in the tooling or API versions.
285-303: Deploying the Demo Applications:
The step-by-step commands for deploying the legacy application, the Drivers database, and the Drivers module (lines 285–303) are comprehensive. Double-check that the repository URLs and file paths (e.g., tolegacy.yaml,redis.yaml, anddrivers.yaml) are correct and accessible.
334-358: Configuring the Event Mesh:
The YAML manifests (lines 334–358) for configuring the Event Mesh via the Broker, SinkBindings, and Triggers are well formatted. Consider adding a brief footnote that explains the significance of settings such asbackoffDelay,backoffPolicy, andretryfor readers less familiar with these concepts.
386-424: Walkthrough Guide for Logs and Testing the Demo:
The walkthrough section (lines 386–424) presents clear instructions and command examples (using bothsternandoc logs) for monitoring the deployed applications—even when scaled to zero. This practical guidance is valuable for troubleshooting.
425-441: Triggering the Legacy Endpoint via cURL:
The example cURL command (lines 425–441) illustrates how to invoke the legacy endpoint effectively. It is recommended to confirm that the JSON payload and the dynamically extracted URL fromoc get ksvc legacyare aligned with the current API specifications.
446-454: Legacy Application Logging Example:
The log snippet (lines 446–454) demonstrating the publication of a CloudEvent is well chosen to showcase the event flow. No further changes are needed here.
825-904: SinkBinding and Trigger Configuration for Event Mesh Wiring:
The YAML manifests for SinkBindings (lines 825–861) and Triggers (lines 868–904) clearly define how events are routed between the services and the Broker. It is advisable to verify that the API versions, resource names, and attribute filters (such as event types) are current with the latest Knative releases.
909-917: Conclusion Summary:
The conclusion (lines 909–917) effectively recaps the benefits of the refactoring, emphasizing improved resilience and eventual consistency. For additional impact, consider summarizing potential next steps or recommendations for further improvements.
Summary by CodeRabbit
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Documentation
Preview comment: #1 (comment)