In fact, I prefer to choose different upstream through rules vincixu <[email protected]> 于2020年9月16日周三 下午4:09写道：
> Nice feature, but I think we should not implement it as a plugin, because > it is not a real plugin, but just a routing function in a specific > scenario. > I think it should belong to Upstream, you can set additional rules for a > single Node. > In addition, I think the option "k8s_deployment_info" of upstream is not > necessary, it limits the user's choice. Maybe we should propose a new > concept `Endpoint` to replace `Node`, and then make `grayscale` as a > conditional setting > > YuanSheng Wang <[email protected]> 于2020年9月14日周一 下午12:09写道： > > > nice feature, +1 > > > > On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 11:54 AM Ming Wen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > cool, +1 > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Ming Wen, Apache APISIX & Apache SkyWalking > > > Twitter: _WenMing > > > > > > > > > wei jin <[email protected]> 于2020年9月14日周一 上午11:16写道： > > > > > > > yes, APISIX implement all feature in route object now, I think it is > > > also > > > > useful to implement in a plugin , and they can be combined to use > > > together. > > > > > > > > Ming Wen <[email protected]> 于2020年9月14日周一 上午9:17写道： > > > > > > > > > Hi, wei jin, > > > > > Do you mean to implement routing matching and dynamically modifying > > > > > upstream in the plugin? > > > > > Both of them are implemented in the router object now. > > > > > So the canary release is now bound to the router. It would be > better > > if > > > > > there is a separate plugin to implement it. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Ming Wen, Apache APISIX & Apache SkyWalking > > > > > Twitter: _WenMing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wei jin <[email protected]> 于2020年9月12日周六 下午4:51写道： > > > > > > > > > > > As we know ， APISIX can configure and distribute traffic through > > > > powerful > > > > > > routing strategies. With this capability, we can achieve > grayscale > > > > > > publishing. > > > > > > > > > > > > After the route is determined, we can again control the traffic > to > > > the > > > > > > specified upstream through a plug-in, but it needs to be > > customized. > > > I > > > > > > propose that the community implement a version of the gray > plug-in > > > that > > > > > > provides the following functions: > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Specify matching conditions (for example, kv pairs of http > > > > > querystring, > > > > > > header and other parameters) > > > > > > 2. When a certain matching condition is met, specify upstream; > > > > > > 3. Specify the condition matching priority; > > > > > > > > > > > > Definition example: > > > > > > > > > > > > ```javascript > > > > > > { > > > > > > "grayscale":{ > > > > > > "rules": [ > > > > > > { > > > > > > "condition": [ > > > > > > { > > > > > > "use": "header", // enum: uri_args/header/path_reg/default > > > > > > "key": "user_id", > > > > > > "values": [ > > > > > > "U1", > > > > > > "U2", > > > > > > "U3" > > > > > > ], > > > > > > "operator": "anyOf" // enum: oneOf/anyOf/prefix/regular/... > > > > > > }, > > > > > > ... > > > > > > ], > > > > > > "upstream": {},// upstream or upstreamId > > > > > > "priority": 10 // 0~100 The larger the value, the higher the > > priority > > > > > > }, > > > > > > { > > > > > > "condition": [ > > > > > > { > > > > > > "use": "header", // enum: uri_args/header/path_reg/default > > > > > > "key": "appkey", > > > > > > "values": [ > > > > > > "dfaef-xfdafe-xj1kl3-1-jhilh1", > > > > > > "dfaef-xfdafe-xj1kl3-2-jhilh1", > > > > > > "dfaef-xfdafe-xj1kl3-3-jhilh1" > > > > > > ], > > > > > > "operator": "anyOf" // enum: oneOf/anyOf/prefix/regular/... > > > > > > }, > > > > > > ... > > > > > > ], > > > > > > "upstream": {},// upstream or upstreamId > > > > > > "priority": 10 // 0~100 The larger the value, the higher the > > priority > > > > > > } > > > > > > ... > > > > > > ] > > > > > > } > > > > > > } > > > > > > ``` > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > *MembPhis* > > My GitHub: https://github.com/membphis > > Apache APISIX: https://github.com/apache/incubator-apisix > > >
