Serverless Callbacks Migration
Proposal to migrate callbacks functionality to serverless architecture
Summary
Proposal to migrate callbacks functionality to a serverless architecture.
Rationale
[To be filled in - reasons for migrating to serverless]
Key benefits expected:
- Improved scalability for callback processing
- Reduced operational overhead
- Cost optimization through pay-per-use model
- Better handling of variable callback volumes
- Enhanced reliability and retry mechanisms
Affected Applications
- flux-callme-service-al39 - Django REST based service for Callback table inserts in private VPC
- flux-callback-service - Django REST based web service for callback sending
Impact
Services Affected
- Callback handling services
- [List additional services and dependencies]
Technical Considerations
- Webhook/callback endpoint compatibility
- Event-driven architecture implementation
- Asynchronous processing requirements
- Retry and failure handling
- Message queue integration
- Timeout and execution limits
Data Considerations
- Callback data storage and logging
- Event sourcing patterns
- Audit trail requirements
- Dead letter queue handling
Implementation Plan
Phase 1: Assessment & Design
- Document current callback workflows
- Identify all callback sources and consumers
- Design event-driven serverless architecture
- Evaluate messaging/queue services (SQS, EventBridge, etc.)
- Define retry and error handling strategy
- Assess monitoring requirements
- Create proof of concept
Phase 2: Development
- Set up serverless infrastructure
- Implement event handlers and processors
- Configure API Gateway for webhook endpoints
- Set up message queues and event routing
- Implement retry logic and dead letter queues
- Set up monitoring, logging, and alerting
- Create comprehensive test suite including failure scenarios
Phase 3: Migration
- Deploy to staging environment
- Integration testing with callback sources
- Load and stress testing
- Failure scenario testing
- Latency and performance validation
- Security review
- Create rollback procedures
Phase 4: Cutover
- Deploy to production
- Gradual traffic migration
- Monitor callback processing rates and success
- Update webhook endpoint configurations
- Validate end-to-end callback flows
- Decommission old infrastructure
- Archive legacy documentation
Risks & Mitigation
| Risk | Impact | Mitigation |
|---|---|---|
| Callback delivery failures | High | Implement robust retry mechanisms and dead letter queues |
| Duplicate callback processing | Medium | Implement idempotency keys and deduplication |
| Cold start latency | Medium | Use provisioned concurrency for critical callbacks |
| Message loss during migration | High | Parallel processing with validation before cutover |
| Timeout issues for long-running callbacks | Medium | Design async processing patterns, evaluate timeout limits |
| Integration breakage | High | Extensive testing with all callback sources |
| Monitoring gaps | Medium | Comprehensive logging and alerting setup |
Timeline
[To be determined]
Status
Current Status: Draft
History:
- 2025-12-22: Proposal created