@claude your code don't compile

Claude finished @haixuanTao's task in 1m 53s —— View job

Fixed Compilation Errors

Tasks

• Read the modified file to understand the changes
• Identify compilation errors
• Fix the compilation errors
• Commit and push the changes

Summary

Fixed the borrow checker error in check_dataflow_finished_after_stop() (binaries/daemon/src/lib.rs:2124).

Problem: The function had a redundant borrow at line 2144 that attempted to get the dataflow again from self.running. This caused a compilation error because we were trying to access other self fields (like self.clock and self.dataflow_node_results) while the borrow was still active.

Solution: Removed the redundant let dataflow = self.running.get(&dataflow_id) line. The borrow from the should_finish check (lines 2131-2140) ends before we access self fields, eliminating the borrow conflict.

The code should now compile successfully.

--- |

@claude nope

Claude finished @haixuanTao's task in 1m 17s —— View job

Fixed Borrow Checker Error

Tasks

• Read the current code to identify the compilation error
• Fix the borrow checker error properly
• Commit and push the fix

Summary

Fixed the borrow checker error in check_dataflow_finished_after_stop() (binaries/daemon/src/lib.rs:2124).

The Issue: The immutable borrow from self.running.get(&dataflow_id) wasn't being dropped early enough, causing conflicts when trying to access other self fields mutably in the if should_finish block.

The Fix: Wrapped the entire check in an explicit block scope:

let should_finish = {
    if let Some(dataflow) = self.running.get(&dataflow_id) {
        // ... condition checks ...
    } else {
        return Ok(());
    }
};

This forces Rust to drop the immutable borrow at the end of the block (before the closing }), ensuring it's released before we enter the if should_finish block that needs mutable access to self.clock, self.dataflow_node_results, self.git_manager, self.coordinator_connection, and self.running.

The code should now compile successfully.

--- | Branch: claude/issue-1333-20260127-0849

only called when a SpawnedNodeResult event is received. Dynamic nodes don't send this event,

Is this true in general, or only when the nodes have not been started yet?

Is this true in general, or only when the nodes have not been started yet?

It's true in general, i think, in the sense that SpawnedNodeResult is sent by the daemon and not the node if I remember correctly.

@claude can you verify

Claude finished @haixuanTao's task in 1m 33s —— View job

Verified: Dynamic Nodes Never Send SpawnedNodeResult

Tasks

• Search for SpawnedNodeResult definition and usage
• Examine daemon code for event handling
• Trace dynamic node lifecycle
• Verify the claim about when SpawnedNodeResult is sent
• Provide answer with code references

Answer

@phil-opp The statement is true in general - dynamic nodes never send SpawnedNodeResult events, regardless of whether they've been started or not.

Evidence from the Code

1. SpawnedNodeResult is sent by the daemon when a spawned process exits

The event is sent in the restart_loop function at binaries/daemon/src/spawn/prepared.rs:151-163:

let event = DoraEvent::SpawnedNodeResult {
    dataflow_id: self.dataflow_id,
    node_id: self.node.id.clone(),
    exit_status,
    dynamic_node: self.node.kind.dynamic(),
    restart,
}

This code is reached after receiving a NodeProcessFinished signal (line 110), which only happens when a spawned process exits.

2. Dynamic nodes don't spawn a process

In spawn_inner at binaries/daemon/src/spawn/prepared.rs:264-266:

None => {
    return Ok(NodeKind::Dynamic);
}

When self.command is None (which defines a dynamic node), the function returns immediately without spawning any process.

3. The restart_loop waits forever for dynamic nodes

While restart_loop is spawned for all nodes (line 90 of spawn), for dynamic nodes:

• The finished_tx channel is never used (since they return early from spawn_inner)
• The restart_loop waits indefinitely at line 110: finished_rx.await
• It never reaches the code that sends SpawnedNodeResult

Conclusion

Dynamic nodes are fundamentally different from spawned nodes - they have no process to monitor or exit status to report. The SpawnedNodeResult event is inherently tied to process lifecycle, so dynamic nodes will never send it.

This is why the PR fix is needed: when all nodes in a dataflow are dynamic, there's no SpawnedNodeResult event to trigger the finish check, so we need an explicit check after stop_all().

| Branch: claude/issue-1333-20260127-0849

I see, thanks for clarifying.

The alternative approach could be to treat the OutputsDone event of dynamic nodes like a SpawnedNodeResult event. This way, we wait until the node reacts to the stop command. However, we would not have any way to deal with hanging nodes because they are started externally, so we cannot kill them.

So not waiting for dynamic nodes at all like implemented in this PR is probably better.

The alternative approach could be to treat the OutputsDone event of dynamic nodes like a SpawnedNodeResult event. This way, we wait until the node reacts to the stop command. However, we would not have any way to deal with hanging nodes because they are started externally, so we cannot kill them.

I think the risk is also that some dynamic node might never be spawned making the dataflow hanging for an event that might never happen

Yes, good point!