Retry making rundirs a few times with randomised exponential backoff #3409
Conversation
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
… launching multiple workflows at once. it's unclear to me why its *so bad* in his situation, but the race condition exists none-the-less and this PR complicates rundir creation to accept that it might be run multiple times concurrently
benclifford
force-pushed
the
benc-rundir-backoff-retry
branch
4 times, most recently
from
a926912 to
7886dcd
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
quentin has experienced a glaring race condition in make_rundirs when launching multiple workflows at once.
it's unclear to me why its so bad in his situation, but the race condition exists none-the-less and this PR complicates rundir creation to accept that it might be run multiple times concurrently
I'm a little unsure of what the right initial values for backoff constant should be ... using random.random() means it will extremely small values in some cases
Type of change