Close #9: Support multiple concurrent worker processes #20
Conversation
This file contains 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
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #20 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 97.90% 59.85% -38.05%
===========================================
Files 6 9 +3
Lines 143 274 +131
===========================================
+ Hits 140 164 +24
- Misses 3 110 +107
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. |
imranariffin
force-pushed
the
9/support-multiple-concurrent-processes
branch
4 times, most recently
from
69ebdc7
to
ea32f3c
Compare
Features: * Accept --concurrency N option and spawn N workers * Wait for child workers ready before propagate msg * Ensure worker exit early with message when app path invalid * Make parallel requests when checking for ready workers Dev features & tech debts: * Ensure run some tests asynchronously * Remove unnecessary GithubAction workflow * Add docstrings to some modules, classes and functions * Cleanup using pylint and black (Will add pylint to CI in the future) * Allow specify test pattern on ./test.sh Notes: Currently we see this warning when running the tests: ``` Task was destroyed but it is pending! task: <Task pending name='Task-5' coro=<Connection.disconnect()\ done, defined at /home/in-gote/workspace/aiotaskq/.venv/lib/\ python3.10/site-packages/aioredis/connection.py:794> wait_for=<\ Future pending cb=[Task.task_wakeup()]>> ``` We should fix it in the future. Also, currently because in some tests (e.g. `test_integration.test_sync_and_async_parity__simple_app`) we're starting the worker in a sub-process, `coverage` doesn't count anything in worker.py. I tried following this guide: https:// coverage.readthedocs.io/en/6.4.4/api_module.html#coverage.process _startup, but I couldn't get it to work. Maybe I missed something. We also need to fix this in the future. We should consider either: 1. Start the worker using `multiprocessing` instead of `subprocess` 2. Somehow follow the guide correctly
imranariffin
force-pushed
the
9/support-multiple-concurrent-processes
branch
from
ea32f3c
to
07e0de6
Compare
cglotr
reviewed
Aug 26, 2022
Also, delint & add more docstring.
|
@cglotr I've applied the requested changes, and also added some more docstrings & delinting. Please review the last two commits when you have time. |
cglotr
reviewed
Aug 29, 2022
cglotr
approved these changes
Aug 29, 2022
This was referenced Aug 29, 2022
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.
Features:
Dev features & tech debts:
Notes:
Currently we see this warning when running the tests:
We should fix it in the future.
Also, currently because in some tests (e.g.
test_integration.test_sync_and_async_parity__simple_app) we'restarting the worker in a sub-process,
coveragedoesn't countanything in worker.py. I tried following this guide, but I couldn't get it to work. Maybe I missed something.
We also need to fix this in the future. We should consider either:
multiprocessinginstead ofsubprocess