exclude "reserved" jobs in Autopopulate.populate
#1107
Merged
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
dimitri-yatsenko
approved these changes
Dec 4, 2023
dimitri-yatsenko
requested changes
Dec 4, 2023
dimitri-yatsenko
approved these changes
Jan 26, 2024
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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 is somewhat related to #1062
Currently, the
max_callsstill does not achieve the expected behavior in cases of existingreservedjobs.Consider the case where there already are 2 reserved jobs (two other processes working on one table with
reserve_jobs=True). Another call ofTable.populate(max_calls=1, reserve_jobs=True)will exit right away, instead of working the next one job (the expected behavior).This is because the list of jobs to be worked on next also include the "reserved" ones, then
max_calls=1leads to selecting the one that is already "reserved".This PR fixes the described problem.
However, there is a bit of a redundancy here, the logic to exclude "reserved" jobs already exists in
.populate1(), just not early enough.