studio/flamenco
studio/flamenco
12
30
Fork 38
Code Issues 63 Pull Requests 5 Releases Wiki Activity

Check for number of workers before soft failing the task. #104195

Merged
Sybren A. Stüvel merged 15 commits from Nitin-Rawat-1/flamenco:104190-job-stuck into main 2023-04-20 11:53:43 +02:00
Conversation 2 Commits 15 Files Changed 2 +18 -10
1 changed files with 18 additions and 10 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
Showing only changes of commit 6e24e0be3b - Show all commits

16
internal/manager/api_impl/worker_task_updates.go
View File

@ -187,17 +187,25 @@ func (f *Flamenco) onTaskFailed(
Int("failedByWorkerCount", numFailed).
Int("threshold", threshold).
Logger()
if numFailed < threshold {
Nitin-Rawat-1 marked this conversation as resolved Outdated
Sybren A. Stüvel commented 2023-03-13 11:27:53 +01:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

If you flip this condition, you can return early and reduce the nesting level of the following code.

if numFailed > threshold {
    return f.hardFailTask(ctx, logger, worker, task, numFailed)
}
numWorkers, err := f.numWorkersCapableOfRunningTask(ctx, task)
...
If you flip this condition, you can return early and reduce the nesting level of the following code. ```go if numFailed > threshold { return f.hardFailTask(ctx, logger, worker, task, numFailed) } numWorkers, err := f.numWorkersCapableOfRunningTask(ctx, task) ... ```
if numFailed > threshold {
return f.hardFailTask(ctx, logger, worker, task, numFailed)
}
numWorkers, err := f.numWorkersCapableOfRunningTask(ctx, task)
Nitin-Rawat-1 marked this conversation as resolved Outdated
Sybren A. Stüvel commented 2023-03-13 11:29:08 +01:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

I'm assuming that 1 is because this worker hasn't been registered as failing this task yet, and thus is still counted. If this is indeed the case, it should be mentioned in a comment, as it's not entirely obvious from glancing at the code. Or maybe I'm wrong, and then there should definitely be a comment that explains where the 1 comes from ;-)

Also it's better to use numWorkers <= 1 here, as this should also hard-fail if there are zero workers left to run this task. Given that it's a very asynchronous system, there could be other factors that we just don't see right now here in this part of the code, that could lead to unexpected results.

I'm assuming that `1` is because this worker hasn't been registered as failing this task yet, and thus is still counted. If this is indeed the case, it should be mentioned in a comment, as it's not entirely obvious from glancing at the code. Or maybe I'm wrong, and then there should definitely be a comment that explains where the `1` comes from ;-) Also it's better to use `numWorkers <= 1` here, as this should also hard-fail if there are zero workers left to run this task. Given that it's a very asynchronous system, there could be other factors that we just don't see right now here in this part of the code, that could lead to unexpected results.
if err != nil {
return err
}
if numWorkers == 1 {
// If number of workers capable of running the failed task again is "1",
// that means we have no worker besides the one that actually failed the task.
// Because at this point in code the worker hasn't been registered as failing this task yet,
// and thus it is still counted.
// In such condition we should just fail the job itself.
if numWorkers <= 1 {
return f.failJobAfterCatastroficTaskFailure(ctx, logger, worker, task)
}
return f.softFailTask(ctx, logger, worker, task, numFailed)
}
return f.hardFailTask(ctx, logger, worker, task, numFailed)
}
// maybeBlocklistWorker potentially block-lists the Worker, and checks whether