-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 665
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
[5.x] Ensure graceful termination of workers marked for termination #1433
Conversation
Please add a thorough description to your PR and not just link to an issue. This will help the people reviewing your PR. |
are there any updates? the same situation |
@taylorotwell going to re-open this one as we've had two reports now of graceful termination not working properly with Horizon. This PR seems to fix it for both cases. Other one here: #1450 |
To add to this remark: #1450 (comment) this only seems to be true in the case of 1 job being processed on termination. When it doesn't occur, the worker is included in the $this->terminatingProcesses() should also not be relevant in this case as its only being used when scaling down processes. I think the real issue lies within the scale() method in ProcessPool.php. When there is 1 process idle and a job is being pushed to the queue, the scale function is being called:
At the moment of that scale check $this->processes is 2 as another process has already been added once the job has been added to the queue. So then scaleDown is called. And in scaleDown it takes the first process in the array and marks that process for termination. But in this scenario that process is actually doing work and shouldn't be marked for termination, it should be the most recently added process. That's why taking the last process in the array and terminate that one instead of the first one also fixed the issue: #1450 (comment). So yeah, this PR will work but is not fixing the cause. |
Thanks @nckrtl. @taylorotwell do you feel like we should first address the real underlying issue? |
@driesvints @nckrtl I'm open to any fix if someone feels there is a deeper issue. I don't have time to personally look into so PRs welcome or adjustments to this PR are fine too. Mark as ready for review when you want me to take another look. |
This PR looks okay, but I also agree with @nckrtl on the underlying issue. I personally think Lines 289 to 299 in c579907
|
Yeah that makes sense. Would make it more solid/useful as well when explicitly checking for running processes elsewhere in the code. Instead of having to keep adding an extra check for the terminating processes as well, like this PR does. Edit: took the liberty of creating a PR with the change @crynobone suggests: #1454 |
Closing this after the fix has been merged in the PR above. |
Fix #1432
Description
There appears to be an issue where workers marked for termination while processing jobs do not terminate gracefully when
horizon:terminate
is subsequently invoked. These workers, while still actively running, are overlooked during the supervisor's termination process. As a result, instead of terminating gracefully, they are killed upon the supervisor's exit.Steps To Reproduce
fast_termination
option set tofalse
usinghorizon
command.scaleDown()
method to be triggered onProcessPool
, ensuring that the process handling the long-running job is marked for termination. For consistent test results, use the code snippet below to simulate a supervisor restart during which all worker processes are marked for termination by scaling process pools down to 0.horizon:terminate
command.