forked from rails/solid_queue
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
Prevent false worker pruning from leaking concurrency permits #11
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
tblais1224
wants to merge
1
commit into
main
Choose a base branch
from
fix/prevent-false-prune-concurrency-leak
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+72
−13
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
what now prevents an actually dead child process with a running supervisor from staying active indefinitely and holding a worker? Is just relaying on forced worker restarts / deploys enough?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe we implement an additional early return with a much longer heartbeat cutoff on the child, like 15 or 30 minutes to address the above concern. Wondering how all this may impact performance too.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Codex reply:
An actually exited child should not remain protected indefinitely. The live supervisor checks the OS every second in
lib/solid_queue/fork_supervisor.rb:27:Once it observes the exit, it fails the child’s claims with
ProcessExitErrorand starts a replacement. Async mode similarly checksinstance.alive?.test/unit/process_recovery_test.rb:18covers killing a worker, having the supervisor reap it, failing its claim, and replacing it.The remaining concern is slightly different: an OS process that is still alive but wedged, or whose heartbeat thread has stopped. The current change intentionally fails closed in that case, so it can hold its claims until the worker/supervisor is restarted.
A second 15–30 minute cutoff would bound that availability problem, but it would also reintroduce the assumption that a sufficiently stale heartbeat proves the execution is dead. If the worker is still running, pruning it would start one overlapping replacement. The new claim-ownership logic prevents that overlap from permanently corrupting the semaphore and amplifying to many workers, but it cannot prevent duplicate external side effects from the initial overlap.
I don’t think query performance is a significant concern here. Pruning runs every five minutes, the process table contains active registrations rather than job history, and both
last_heartbeat_atandsupervisor_idare indexed.My preference is to keep this PR safety-first. If we need bounded recovery for alive-but-hung workers, a safer follow-up would have the owning supervisor terminate and reap the child after a longer threshold, then release its claim only after the OS confirms the child exited. That preserves the concurrency guarantee instead of returning the permit while the old process may still execute.