Clarify that key_suffix is not scoped to each strategy#221
Merged
Conversation
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #221 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 98.97% 98.97%
=======================================
Files 19 19
Lines 486 486
Branches 85 85
=======================================
Hits 481 481
Misses 5 5 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
ixti
approved these changes
Jan 20, 2026
Owner
ixti
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The documentation was wrong, indeed. Thank you for the PR and the fix.
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
This PR updates the README example showing multiple concurrency strategies to make sure they generate different key suffixes. Previously the example was misleading because the calculated key suffixes could overlap, causing surprising behavior.
The example says it is intended to
But if there were two jobs running with project_id
1then all jobs for user_id1would also be throttled, because there would already be two jobs under the key1. This is probably not the intended behavior.This PR also adds a spec to demonstrate the behavior.
@ixti do you have any other suggestions on how to clarify this behavior? Or do you think it should be considered a bug?