|
| 1 | +Docker Voting App done Serverless Style |
| 2 | +======================================= |
| 3 | + |
| 4 | +# Introduction |
| 5 | +I was reading [Deploy the Voting App to AWS ECS with Fargate] by Tony Pujals where he describes how to run the [Docker Voting app demo] on AWS using [AWS Fargate] |
| 6 | + |
| 7 | + [Deploy the Voting App to AWS ECS with Fargate]:https://medium.com/@tonypujals/deploy-the-voting-app-to-aws-ecs-with-fargate- |
| 8 | + [Docker Voting app demo]:https://github.com/subfuzion/docker-voting-app-nodejs |
| 9 | + [AWS Fargate]:https://aws.amazon.com/fargate/ |
| 10 | + |
| 11 | +Of course I understand that the Docker Voting app is a showcase of Docker technology and that it's not the most exciting application from a business perspective. I also understand that people want to show how you can take Docker technology to AWS. However in my mind I started wondering: if I would take this to AWS would I be following the same path ? Or would I go Serverless ? |
| 12 | + |
| 13 | +Given the title: I went Serverless! |
| 14 | + |
| 15 | +The voting application is recreated using AWS ApiGateway and AWS DynamoDB only. The queue service could be implemented using SNS, however one typically uses a queue to ensure scalability of the database or to allow for maintenance. Both are handled by AWS DynamoDB automatically. |
| 16 | + |
| 17 | +# Creating the schema |
| 18 | +Looking at the sources of the voting app there are two endpoints: |
| 19 | +- POST /vote where you can post a vote by posting JSON like `{"vote":"a"}` or `{"vote":"b"}` |
| 20 | +- GET /results which will give you results like: |
| 21 | +```json |
| 22 | +{ |
| 23 | + "success" : true, |
| 24 | + "result" : { |
| 25 | + "a" : 0, |
| 26 | + "b" : 0 |
| 27 | + } |
| 28 | +} |
| 29 | +``` |
| 30 | + |
| 31 | +Creating a JSON schema produces the following for /vote |
| 32 | + |
| 33 | +```json |
| 34 | +{ |
| 35 | + "Vote": { |
| 36 | + "type": "object", |
| 37 | + "required": ["vote"], |
| 38 | + "properties": { |
| 39 | + "vote": { |
| 40 | + "type": "string", |
| 41 | + "enum": ["a", "b"] |
| 42 | + } |
| 43 | + }, |
| 44 | + "title": "Vote Schema" |
| 45 | + } |
| 46 | +} |
| 47 | +``` |
| 48 | +and for /results |
| 49 | + |
| 50 | +```json |
| 51 | +{ |
| 52 | + "type": "object", |
| 53 | + "properties": { |
| 54 | + "success": { |
| 55 | + "type": "boolean" |
| 56 | + }, |
| 57 | + "result": { |
| 58 | + "type": "object", |
| 59 | + "properties": { |
| 60 | + "a": { |
| 61 | + "type": "integer" |
| 62 | + }, |
| 63 | + "b": { |
| 64 | + "type": "integer" |
| 65 | + } |
| 66 | + } |
| 67 | + } |
| 68 | + }, |
| 69 | + "title": "Results schema" |
| 70 | +} |
| 71 | +``` |
| 72 | + |
| 73 | +Loading these in APIgateway ensures for /vote that only valid POST requests are accepted. |
| 74 | + |
| 75 | +# DynamoDB |
| 76 | +The DynamoDB instance with partion key `topic` only holds one record with `topic` value `default` and a numeric value for `a` and `b` |
| 77 | + |
| 78 | +# APIgateway integration |
| 79 | +A succesful POST operation must result in a increment of the counter for the subject of the vote in the database. |
| 80 | +This is achieved by adding the following integration request mapping template to the POST operation: |
| 81 | +```json |
| 82 | +{ |
| 83 | + "TableName" : "VoteAppDynamoDBTable", |
| 84 | + "Key": { |
| 85 | + "topic": { |
| 86 | + "S":"default" |
| 87 | + } |
| 88 | + }, |
| 89 | + "UpdateExpression": "ADD $input.path('$.vote') :inc", |
| 90 | + "ExpressionAttributeValues": { |
| 91 | + ":inc": { |
| 92 | + "N": "1" |
| 93 | + } |
| 94 | + } |
| 95 | +} |
| 96 | +``` |
| 97 | +This, together with the rest of the integration configuration, will transform the POST operation into a call to DynamoDB to increment the number of votes for the subject provided. |
| 98 | + |
| 99 | +Then when pulling results the GET operation needs to be transformed into a query on DynamoDB using an integration request mapping template |
| 100 | +```json |
| 101 | +{ |
| 102 | + "TableName" : "VoteAppDynamoDBTable", |
| 103 | + "KeyConditionExpression": "topic = :v1", |
| 104 | + "ExpressionAttributeValues": { |
| 105 | + ":v1": { |
| 106 | + "S": "default" |
| 107 | + } |
| 108 | + } |
| 109 | +} |
| 110 | +``` |
| 111 | +and the response needs to be mapped to the schema listed above using an integration response mapping template |
| 112 | +``` |
| 113 | +#set($inputRoot = $input.path('$')) |
| 114 | +{ |
| 115 | + "success" : true, |
| 116 | + "result" : { |
| 117 | +#if($inputRoot.Count==0) |
| 118 | + "a" : 0, |
| 119 | + "b" : 0 |
| 120 | +#{else} |
| 121 | + "a" : #if($inputRoot.Items[0].a=="")0#{else}$inputRoot.Items[0].a.N#end, |
| 122 | + "b" : #if($inputRoot.Items[0].b=="")0#{else}$inputRoot.Items[0].b.N#end |
| 123 | +#end |
| 124 | + } |
| 125 | +} |
| 126 | +``` |
| 127 | +As long as no votes have been casted it could be that the whole record does not exist yet or that `a` or `b` is still non-existent. This template takes care of these edge cases. |
| 128 | + |
| 129 | +The full template can be found [here]. |
| 130 | + |
| 131 | + [here]:voteApp-CF-template.json |
0 commit comments